Central Glosa

Karo Xavi–

I really liked the vocabulary in the BACK of the book CENTRAL = GLOSA, “5000 English into Glosa 1000,” when it first came out. But some pr= oblems were always apparent to me:

1) It contains much more than 1000 Glos= a words.

2) This vocabulary and the vocabulary of “Glosa 1000” at the FRON= T of the book are not well coordinated. For example, front/DOMINA and back= /CEFA have the same meaning.

Some of these problems have been corrected in= the Glosa Internet Dictionary (GID). For example, CEFA is now the preferr= ed word.

Words marked with both ++ and + in the GID should approximate the= vocabulary of “5000 English into Glosa 1000.”

Saluta, _ _ /. /\ Gary # =

— In glosalist@yahoogroups.com, “Xavier Abadia” <xabadiar@…> wrote:

= Hello!

The word QOD is okay according to the dictionary I’m using (“= CENTRAL GLOSA. 5000 English into Glosa 1000 with Etymological Notes”, 1993)= :

WHAT, THAT WHICH =3D QOD … WHICH … =3D QI

Xavi.

= — In glosalist@yahoogroups.com, “Kim” <kimesperanto@> wrote:

Ave = Glosa-pe!

I am trying to work out exactly what ‘qod’ means, compar= ing and contrasting it to ‘qi’. It is not used in the “18 Steps” document.= In the online dictionary, it means “what (that which)”. I found 2 uses a= mong Ashby/Clark documents:

1. Plus, id sio evita excesi specializ= a per face mo verba akti qod in Plu Palaeo Lingua gene face per tri alo m= a. It would also steer clear of over-specialization by making one word= do what in natural languages is often [done] by three or more.

= (from Paraleli Textu, Wendy Ashby & Ronald Clark, =A9 GEO, 1993)

= Here it is the object of the first phrase ‘mo verba akti’, and the subject = of coming verb ‘gene face’. It is sort of a relative pronoun, like ‘qi’, b= ut larger than that.

1. “Mi ne es tu, e ne ski; qod tu ski,” rea= kti Huitze, … “ “That I, not being you, do not know what you know,”= replied Huitze…”

(from Piski Hedo, Wendy Ashby & Ron Clark, =A9= GEO, 1994)

Here it is the direct object of ‘mi … ne ski’, and t= he direct object of the coming ‘tu ski’.

So to me it seems equival= ent to ‘u-la; qi’ - that which. Thus we could have the equivalent rewritin= gs:

1a. Plus, id sio evita excesi specializa per face mo verba akt= i u-la; qi in Plu Palaeo Lingua gene face per tri alo ma.

2a. “= Mi ne es tu, e ne ski u-la; qi tu ski,” reakti Huitze, …”

Is t= hat how you all understand qod’s meaning? Other thoughts?

(Note -= I realize 2a violates the rule in 18 Steps stating that ‘qi’ should be omi= tted in this case. please overlook so we can focus on the main point.) =

Gratia!! Kim