Re: Mi gene sko de Glosa..

~Glosa habe eu fono.~ S / V / O NOUN VERB NOUN Phrase Phrase Phrase ~eu fo= no~ Modifier/ Substantive NOUN

This is the purest form of the expression.= By seeking to impose adjectival forms and continuous tense onto these Glos= a sentences, I believe you are importing ‘National Language’ structures to = a place where they ought not be.

sts: I think I have read these structures= , and I was wondering.

"”is”” is a very sloppily used English language ve= rb. For this reason, in Glosa there are four possible renditions of ““is””.=

habe (has the property of) - this rendition is used in Francais. eqa (is e= qual to) - for exact scientific equivalence. gene (becomes, or is getting) =

• for gradual changes es (is the same as) - to be avoided where other usage= s are more correct.

sts: OK. I’m very intersted in the syntax-based gramma= r. But we cannot always elide it saying that it is so simple that we don’t = need to formulate it.

### In terms of:- “Glosa habe eu fono.” - “Glosa ha= s a beautiful sounding.”

~ ^ did you notice that you added a few grammati= cal niceties to the English not in the Glosa? One Glosa rule might be: wher= e the simple form will do, then that is it. ‘Glosa has beautiful sound.’ is= a full sentence, and says everything the writer of the Glosa intended. -FU= L is added, not because it is in the original, which is grammatically satis= fied by its word order, but by the requirements of English that needs to te= ll us that the beauty is not an object in itself (VERB function), but that = the ‘beauty’ concept is modifying some other object.

sts: Yes, I noticed. = You’re already advising how to speak good Glosa. But first I must learn h= ow to speak correct Glosa.

#

I think “Glosa is beutiful(ly) sounding”= is an angicism that is not appropriate for an auxlang. “Glosa sounds beau= tiful” should do. “Glosa es eu fono.” should mean only “Glosa is a beautif= ul sound.’ I couldn’t agree more. However, according to the rules of “HEAD = FINAL” phrase structure, a well-formed ‘head final’ phrase has the substant= ive word (VERB or NOUN) last with the modifiers leading up to them.

sts: O= K=85 you say =84head final”, this might be a syntax rule. But what is a hea= d? I have thought about phrases myself a bit, and I think in terms like =84= subject”, =84predicate”, =84object”. I see you: I (subject), see (predicate= ), you (object) fly on the wall: fly (subject), on (predicate), the wall (o= bject) And I think of various markers, like =84the”, =84a”, =84many” (noun = phrase markers), =84very”, =84so”, =84not” (predicate phrase markers), and = theoretically a sentence marker like =84is”, perhaps. Hm, but I’m not sure = if we’re talking about the same concepts. Glosa is still strange to me, and= there is very little literature about it. Where did you read about the hea= d final structure, and what does it mean?

Glosa English MODIFIERS ADJECTI= VES or ADVERBS

Thus, in well formed Glosa, the concepts that are function= ing as modifiers are placed before the concepts that are functioning as ver= bs or nouns.

sts: But the verb modifies the subject and comes after subj= ect. It’s not that simple and absolute, I think.

Translating from English= to Glosa: /~~~~ modifier v /~~~ substantive “Glosa sounds beautiful.” —>= ~Glosa eu sono.~ verb NOUN / VERB / VERB Phrase Phrase Phrase

I thin= k now that “u-ci” is a noun. (“Que u-ci es tu domi?”) *** Ya, ~u-ci~ fu= nktio iso u nomina-verbi: uti un England-lingua, na sio uti u verbi, “p= ro-noun”. Id eqa u speciali Glosa stru: u =3D the; ci =3D here. (this) =

Gratia, sed … *verbi -> verba - or does “verbi” exist, too?

#

Sorry= about this: I tend, on occasion, to speak ‘Paleo Glosa’. Once, when Ron ha= d declared that the terminal vowel was ‘floating’ (i.e.optional) I preferre= d the sound of the terminal -i for this word. In fact, my ancient, 1992 GLO= SA 6000 dictionary lists ‘VERBI word’.

sts: Interesting =96 how can I acce= ss this kind of declarations? I feel cut off. : )

In this case a noun= phrase with “domi” would cause the first noun to become an adjective= . In this case I would prefer “domi u-ci” (“housy that”) instead of = “u-ci domi” (“thaty house”). *** ci =3D here la =3D there u-ci =3D= this u-la =3D that

Iso u pro-nomina-verba, ~u-ci~ habe u funktio d= e u deskribe-verbi.

Id loka intra u nomina-grega es pre u substant= ia nomina- verbi.

So in a noun phrase the adjective comes first, and th= en comes the noun, right? But this rule doesn’t always apply, I will look = for examples.

#

Yes Stephan. Check out the concept of ‘Head Final Phrase= s’.

sts: Still I think that a verb is like an adjective =96 a predicate. B= oth should have the same position.

There are even modern English language= text books - often with “Functional Grammar” in their titles - that explai= n sequences in good English that demonstrate the hierarchy of word elements= in a Noun Phrase e.g. these three big brown bears

Try relocating the ord= er and still getting a satisfactory phrase. This is an example of pure Synt= ax-based Grammar.

Couldn’t Chinese be an interesting example of phras= ing these concepts? Their language is isolating as well. *** Id es= so. U Cina-pe pa dice a mi ke an lingua habe u homo stru de Glosa.

Coo= l!

Sintaxi habe vikto!

sts: By the way =96 why not =84sintaxi vikto”= ?

[sintax has victory] Eng. Syntax wins.

Que “u bibli ge-= grafo ex G. B. Shaw” es “u ge-grafo ex G. B. Shaw bibli”? *** Eng.= True, but clunkily so.

Posi: Id es u bibli qi pa es ge-grafo ex G.= B. Shaw.

Id es u bibli qi es ge-grafo ex G.B. Shaw.

Id es u= bibli; ge-grafo ex G.B. Shaw.

U-ci bibli gene ge-grafo ex G.B. Sha= w.

Nota: ~ge-grafo ex G. B. Shaw~ eqa u fo komplexi deskribe-grega= .

Gratia. Id es u bibli qui pa es ge-grafo ex G.B. Shaw. Ergo “qui pa = es ge-grafo ex G.B. Shaw” equa u deskribe-grega, que? Plus-co “ge-grafo ex= G.B. Shaw” equa u deskribe-grega. Sed mu es poste substantia-verba.

#

W= ith apologies, I might seem to be introducing a new rule at a late date, bu= t there are in English both “phrases” and “clauses”. Glosa allows people to= use both structures as well. Rather boringly, I called them ~plu minor gre= ga~ and ~plu major grega~. (phrases and clauses). Notice the three sentence= s following the word, ~Posi~, above.

sts: A clause has a verb, a phrase ha= sn’t, is it that?

These show how in Glosa we can elide ~qi pa es~ by repl= acing the words with a semicolon (;) However the elided form, ~;ge-grafo ex= G.B. Shaw.~ is still an adjectival clause modifying the word ~bibli~. Clau= ses, having a VERB of their own are mini sentences in their own right, and = thus have their own Subject-Verb-Object structure.

sts: That’s OK, but I s= till don’t understand why we can put an adjective clause/phrase in front an= d behind a noun phrase. That’s sort of anarchy, so to say.

IE ; qi pa es = ge-grafo ex G.B. Shaw. / Clause Pronoun Verb Indirect marker Phrase Object =

sts: I come to the conclusion that =84es”, =84habe”, =84gene”, =84eqa” are= sentence markers. The =84qi” marks the sentence as a predicate. In a simil= ar way =84u” and =84plu” are noun phrase markers, and =84fu” and =84pa” are= predicate markers.

P.S. I prefer to use the ~gene~ equivalent of “is” ra= ther than the ~es~ here, because the book ““got”” written over time; and co= nsidering that we have established in the primary clause that it is a boo= k, it is somewhat semantically repetitive to repeat that it “is” a book aga= in. While I probably sound a bit pedantic, I say so simply to give an examp= le of the confusion which is “is” in English.

sts: I understand. That’s go= od.

“There is” =3D “il es”, but “It’s getting dark” is “id gene no-fo= to”. Why not “il gene no-foto?”. Is there any real “id” that’s getting=

dark? *** Good question. ~il~ was a late addition to the Glos= a lexicon: the authors found the need for that indeterminate “there”.

B= y the way, where are the authors now? Do they still develop Glosa?

#

Wend= y lives in Surry in England: Glosa Education Organisation P.O. Box 18, Rich= mond Surry, TW9 2GE U.K. and has just sent me the eight-page printed period= ical, “PLU GLOSA NOTA.” This is edition 91. If you subscribed to this, you = would see a lot more Glosa in action. Unfortunately, Ron Clark is no longer= with us.

sts: Can I receive it in Germany, too? What do I have to do in o= rder to receive it? (Ain’t sure if have the time to do much more Glosa at t= he moment, though.)

Thank you for all the answers.

Regards, Stephan S= chneider

#

Sorry about using so much English, but I wanted to get more de= eply into the theory behind Glosa.

sts: No problem. :) I had to do the sam= e. Thank you again for the answers.

Regards, Stephan Schneider