Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: [glosalist] Re: English-Glosa web page translator

Robin Fairbridge Gaskell (Robin Fairbridge Gaskell <drought-breaker@...>) on November 20, 2006

Saluta plu Amika,

At 12:11 PM 11/11/06, Nikolao pa Grafo:

Thanks. I will give the same for Esperanto. It would be intresting Eo<->Glosa For all: use a simple English, please (if you hate Eo)


I think we should work out what we are aiming at … what are our long-term objectives, before going off in all directions.

If we seek a ‘Middle Language’ [ML] that can go between two natural (or national) languages, then it ought to be “machine handleable, and the process of conversion to the ML from one language, and the translation of the ML to another natural language both ought to be machine handleable. This was the ethic behind the DLT (Distributed Language Translation) project that had a form of “Esperanto” as the ML. (or bridge language) in 1972. But the Esperantists sponsoring the DLT project kept too tight a hand on the form of their precious ML i.e. Esperanto, and demanded that the bridge be readily humanly readable … as well as machine readable.

This was their mistake, and the decision crippled the DLT project.

So, if Glosa-pe wish to try their hand at making Glosa a ML, then the priority ought to be in making the form of “Glosa” used, for the purpose of translation, eminently machine readable first, and humanly readable second.

On a ^different tack^, I would advise users of Glosa that its syntax is very close to that of well-formed English BUT …

… while well-written Glosa will map onto English (meaning that: replacing Glosa words with English-language equivalents will usually be readily understood by a reader of English), the opposite is not usually the case. Properly syntactic Glosa is designed to be a purer form of communication than is vernacular English.

So, while I might be out of touch with present developments in Glosa, I am still of the opinion that Glosa’s strength is in its Syntax-based Grammar.

The explanation is simply that much is assumed in vernacular English, and much elision occurs in its use. This is satisfactory to native-born speakers of English, but causes hell for many learners of English as a Second Language. It is for this reason that I put in a strong plea for the use of syntactically-correct, un-elided Glosa.

Saluta Mi Plu Amika,

Robin Gaskell

Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: [glosalist] Re: English-Glosa web page translator - Committee on language planning, FIAS. Coordination: Vergara & Hardy, PhDs.