Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »


Vasiliy (Vasiliy <vabot@...>) on February 6, 2006


Karo plu Glosa-pe

Quote: [ From: <sydpidd@…>

To: Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 6:47 PM Subject: Re: [glosalist] a universal grammar ish ?? It’s OK. Try to make Glosa+Esperanto *** Not too sure about this: these two Planned Languages are at the opposite ends of the inflected/non-inflected spectrum. They are certainly ^chalk and cheese^ when compared


I don’t agree with it. There are millions of points in any spectrum between opposite ends. There are very many abilities. The real limitations have became formed by desires of people, agreements between them and their relative standards. It’s easy to make any Glosa+Esperanto lang. I have an idea and i think it may be very interesting! Sorry i have no time for it.

There is evident contradiction in the quote above. If a set of inflected/non-inflected languages may be represented as SPECTRUM, then there ISN’T any shape BORDER between its ENDS.

Look on non-planed languages’ spectrum: chines > english > franch > romanian > italian > hebrew > german > russian > latin

Esperanto lays near Romanian, it has two noun cases as English or Romanian. It is not a fact that absolutely isolated language is better then any one in this spectrum, particularly in its middle. Chines is easier for english-speaking people, but not so easy for people speaking on inflected lang.

Where is a border in this spectrum: article (english a, the) > article attached to the end of word (romanian …ul, bulgarian …ta) > suffix (russian, esperanto …o)?

All borders are ambiguous!

Saluta, Vasiliy.

Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Glosa+Esperanto? - Committee on language planning, FIAS. Coordination: Vergara & Hardy, PhDs.