Re: [glosalist] Glosa on web

  But the very strange thing that I must note, here, is that year after  year, Glosa-pe were adding to the vocabulary, suggesting slight  improvements in it here and there, but only a few actually tried to use the  language with its Syntax-based Grammar, while agreeing that the vocabulary  was not necessarily perfect, though knowing it was extremely usable.

  Glosa could progress for another decade through gradual improvements  to the vocabulary - and virtually nothing else.

  Sad to say, I do now believe that the language is hard to use, simply  because the use of non-literal language is excluded.  Having the  availability of both Greek and Latin roots - at most one root from each  ancient language - removes a straight-jacket from the language, and does  provide relief for stylists, who might otherwise find endless repetition of  a single meme uncomfortable.  The lack of metaphors does make  thinking-in-Glosa tricky.

  The other problem with learning the language is the absence of a  'rule-book' .  If Syntax is the thing, then I believe that GOOD SYNTAX can,  and must, be taught.  However, Ron Clark did not perceive this as a  stumbling block to people's learning of the language.   On the NeT there is  still an attempt of mine to tabulate the usage of Glosa ... after the  event.  I observed the use of Glosa in Plu Glosa Nota and also considered  my experience in trying to use the language, and reached a few conclusions:  somewhere on the Web, there is a Glosa Grammar of sorts.

  More than that, I pondered the removal of actual words from the  expression of syntax, and came up with a ^shorthand^ method of using  symbols to demonstrate the syntactic elements of language.  While it might  sound a bit Linguistically high-handed of me to do this, I did not take  courage to do so until after I had found two books showing previous  attempts to symbolically represent syntax - in Sydney University Library.

  I suspect that lurking, waiting to be discovered, there is a  ``Grammar of Syntax.``  Maybe, when Linguists discover it there will be a  breakthrough in the 'Universal Grammar.'  However, it will need to be  written up in much more understandable language than that used by Chomsky.

  If mankind ever does find out just how syntax really works, then a  break-through in International Auxiliary Language should occur.  If not,  ultimately the well-organized army of Esperantists will have their way.