Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Stephan, Xavier

Gary Miller (Gary Miller <gmillernd@...>) on March 31, 2012

STEPHAN: Do you mean, you can’t remember Latin endings, the endings I propo= sed or (some) Glosa endings?

REAKTI: I used to be fairly fluent in Russian= and German. No more! Languages are like most other things in life: They’re= a lot easier when you’re young. I still remember Glosa - mostly. I’m not e= ven sure my own name ends in Y anymore. :-)

STEPHAN: And, what is the easi= est? Root ending derivation rules like the ones I propose wouldn’t make Glo= sa (or Glota) any more difficult, because you don’t need to learn them (the= y are not productive as in Esperanto). You just need to know that “hand” is= “manu” and not “mani” (as in “manipulate”), and that “nati” is “birth” and= that “natio” is “nation” and not the other way round. That is the same “ea= siest” as before, isn’t it? Glosa words like “manu”, “nati” and “natio” are= the same in Glota (my dialect). But they do follow root ending derivation = rules, which shows that Glosa could have had them, too, and in some cases e= ven gives the impression of having them.

REAKTI: The one you remember is t= he easiest. It’s like this: Glosa derives its vocabulary from modern Latin = and Greek scientific/technical words. MANU is the preferred Glosa word. If = I can’t remember MANU, but I remember the English word MANIPULATE and deriv= e the word as MANI instead, I have not made a mistake. I like not making mi= stakes. :-)

XAVIER: it’s natural that this discussion is happening on and = on. People may get astonished at the dictionary (as I did) when they find m= any translations for a certain word, some just differing on the final vowel= ! This way the morphology of the language may look chaotic. Of course this = may be due to the early Glosa textbooks. Anyway, the problem remains.

REAK= TI: When one realizes that Glosa words are derived from varying words from = varying languages, one would expect the ends of the Glosa words to vary too= .

XAVIER: In my viewpoint are three options:

  1. Since the final vowel is = not important, and it is only there to ease pronunciation, so let’s give a = certain final vowel to all words. -E is the characteristic vowel of the mai= n Latin declension (the 3rd) and it is the characteristic ending of verbs, = at their infinitive -re. I am really testing this -E option with a reformed= Latino Sine Flexione.

REAKTI: I would argue that there is no characterist= ic vowel in the original Latin. Latin speakers themselves added the E to ma= ke pronunciation easy. This E is often unstressed in the original Latin, is= missing in such forms as ESSE and FERRE and FAC and DIC. I agree that addi= ng the E in man-made language plans is a good idea.

Different inter= national language plans have used different means of obtaining their base v= ocabulary. LSF did this directly from Latin, Esperanto from a mix of modern= Romance and Germanic words, Glosa from modern scientific/technical terms, = Lojban from languages all over the world. There is nothing wrong with any o= f these plans, they are simply different.

Good luck with Glota! Maybe it w= ill finally be the right one. You’ll find there is no shortage of critics o= ut there. :-) But the real trick is to get people to USE the language. Most= people who criticize these languages rarely read or write more than a few = sentences.

When I started studying the international language problem, I w= anted to test the languages by using them. (I still use LSF a little; see g= Glosa was the one I learned the = fastest. I also feel it most freely expresses ideas.

Even more important i= s support. No international language will be successful without a group of = people actively promoting it. Esperanto has the most support, therefore it = is the one most people hear about.

Saluta, _ _ /. /\ =A0 Garx #

Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Stephan, Xavier - Committee on language planning, FIAS. Coordination: Vergara & Hardy, PhDs.