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

At 05:09 AM 11/20/06, ernobe pa grafo:

— In glosalist%40yahoogroups.comglosalist@yahoogroups.com, “Nick N. Mikhailenko” <nick0000@…> wrote:

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)

Nikolao

First make it Glosa -> Esperanto, so you can read and understand Glosa in Esperanto. This is easier and more practical than Esperanto -> Glosa because Glosa has only one word for each concept, and relies on the user to give a meaningful context to those concepts so that the precise meaning becomes evident. I am working on Glosa -> English and Glosa -> Spanish programs, and will make the wordlists available so that others can use them to translate Glosa into their own languages.

Interesting! This idea, that writing in Glosa demands using words in meaningful context is roughly the same idea that I have been stressing for years, i.e. that the correct use of Glosa demands an elegant accuracy.

     Thus, if information is laid down in Glosa, it is quite easy  to translate out of it -- into other national languages and even into  other Planned Languages.
     If the above idea is correct, it would stamp Glosa as the  ideal Middle Language and as a suitable candidate for as the bridge  language in a computer translation process.  What is more, the bridge  language, i.e. Glosa, or a close variant of it, would be readable by  humans as well as by machines.

     And on the reference to "Glosa -> Esperanto" I would  definitely find the well-written Glosa version of a document a lot  easier to understand than the well-written Esperanto version of  it.  In fact, I had to do a translation, on paper, from Esperanto  into English when the now Professor of Linguistics in China, Haitao,  insisted on answering my Glosa letters to him in Esperanto.

Saluta,

Robin Gaskell

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]