Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »
Glosa and Esperanto - Secret Siblings?
William Patterson (William Patterson <esperantisto@...>) on September 30, 2003
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:10:43 +1000, Robin wrote:
I still think Glosa is= suitable as the IAL, but know that Esperanto has the organisation.
I ag= ree completely. And I have also found that Esperanto and Glosa have a lot i= n common. In an interesting but little-known text, L. L. Zamenhof, the crea= tor of Esperanto, wrote…
I have arranged the language to allow for the=
ideas into independent words, so that the entire language,
#= instead of consisting of words in various grammatical forms,
is made up =
exclusively of unchanging [invariant] words.
Sounds like Glosa, no? Then h= e said…
But because a linguistic structure of this kind is entirely
foreign to European peoples and it would be difficult for them
to grow us=
ed to it, I have presented this analytical aspect
of the language in a co=
mpletely different way, in conformity
with the spirit of the European lan=
guages, so that anyone
learning my language with a textbook, without havi=
the introduction first (which is quite unnecessary to the
er), would not even imagine that the construction of this
ed from his or her mother tongue.
So that explains why Esperanto looks syn= thetic. Then he went on to explain a structure that sounds very much like G= losa, yet appears to be conventionally European…
The word fratino, for=
example, in reality consists of three
words: frat ‘brother’, in ‘woman’,=
o (‘something that is, or
exists’) (=3D that which is a brother-woman =
=3D ‘sister’). But the
textbook explains fratino as follows: ‘brother’ is=
it ends in -o because all nouns end in -o in the nominative,
#= hence frat’o; to indicate the female form of this same idea,
we add the =
small word in, hence frat’in’o; and the apostrophes
are added to show the=
constituent grammatical parts of the
In this way the analytical=
nature of the language in no way
embarrasses the student; he does not ev=
en suspect that what
he calls an ending or a prefix or a suffix is, in fa=
entirely free-standing word, which carries the same meaning
her it comes at the beginning or end of another word or
stands on its own=
; that every word can be used equally as a
root-word or as a grammatical =
(In hindsight, in the “modern” world, he perhaps chose an unfort= unate example. It’s that sort of word which prompts accusations of sexism i= n Esperanto. (An anti-female sexism, which argument I’ve always found stran= ge because, as in many languages, and in life, the female is accorded speci= al consideration, while the male is treated like an inanimate object, neutr= al, neuter.))
But the root meaning of “frat” is really more like “sibling”= ; unadorned, “frat o” means brother; decorated with the feminine particle, = “frat in o” means sister. Nowadays some Esperantists use the suffix “ich” t= o indicate maleness, yielding “frat ich o” to parallel “frat in o”. The imp= ortant point is that although Esperanto looks synthetic, it can easily be t= reated analytically, like Glosa. I’ve experimented a bit with an analytical= Esperanto, that is, an Esperanto vocabulary with a Glosa grammar:
Esperan= to Analytical Esperanto Glosa ——— —–= ————— —– La frato alvenis. La ich-frat-o is al-ven. = U an-sibi pa ariva. La fratino alvenis. La in-frat-o is al-ven. U fe= -sibi pa ariva.
Like Glosa, past, present, future:
Analytical Esperanto = Glosa ——————– —– La ich-frat-o is al-ven. U an= -sibi pa ariva. La ich-frat-o as al-ven. U an-sibi nu ariva. La ich-frat-= o os al-ven. U an-sibi fu ariva.
Substitution of Esperanto roots for Glo= sa roots generally yields a pretty good Analytical Esperanto (if the Glosa = writer avoids words like “adelfa” and “sorori”!), and the reverse is also t= rue (if the Esperanto writer avoids neologistic synonyms).
William W. Patterson http://ttt.kafejo.com http://ttt.komputado.com Kio= m da homoj, tiom da gustoj.
Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »