Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: [glosalist] word order

Jay Sistar (Jay Sistar <jaysistar@...>) on July 2, 2007

Present tence verb markers are not a bad thing to include because they add clarity to what you’re saying. However, flexable word order is not a very good idea. People learning the language from other word order languages would likely adopt their own personal word order, which would be difficult for people comming from other word ordered languages. The accual order chosen doesn’t matter, but the fact that it is chosen, and therefore univerally the same word order is used is very important for quick clarity of communication.

Artifical langauges are much easier to understand -because- of their constraints that they have placed upon their language. Lifting constraits is not always a good idea.

Esperanto accaully focused on the wrong constraint for best clarity: Noun declination makes the language have to change spelling of a word giving rise to the concept of a “root” word and a “declined” word.

Glosa does not make this destinction, but it does so simply at the cost of having to use word order to find whether the noun is the subject object or indirect object of the sentence. Glosa’s markers also obey these rules. That is why Glosa is an easier language to pick up than Esperanto.

-Jay

—– Original Message —- From: Eike Preuss <mail@…> To: glosalist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 2, 2007 9:03:55 AM Subject: Re: [glosalist] word order

Hi all, I still don’t like the idea of a flexible word order, it’s one of the things that I really don’t like in Esperanto. Since this was already discussed on this list, I’ll refer to my two cents given in http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ glosalist/ message/691 and http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ glosalist/ message/813

In these posts I explain why I would like both for glosa: a) a (present mode / neutral) verb marker, because it makes the sentence structure more obvious b) a clearer and even stricter defined word order, where I don’t really care whether it is SVO, VSO, SOV or whatever of the 6 combinations, as long as it will be only one of them

:))

Eike

On Jul 2, 2007, at 11:12 AM, lenadi_moucina wrote:

“I had some contact with hindi some time ago and am thinking of how glosa could use hindi word order -verb final, also some slight contact with welsh verb first”

I think that it could be easy to make Glosa a few independant of the word order. It need only two particules :

  • one to mark the object of a verb
  • one to mark the present mode of a verb.

Try “i” for the object mark and “to” [:-)] for the mark of the present mode. You can now write this Glosa clause “an frakti u botilia” by different ways. (an) (TO frakti) (“I” u botilia) (TO frakti) (an) (I u botilia) (an)(I botilia) (TO frakti) {note that AN is the subject, if it is a reflexive pronoun you have to write “I an” : [(botilia) (to frakti) (I AN)] } (I u botilia) (TO frakti) (an) And so on : (I u botilia) (PA frakti) (an) (I u botilia) (FU frakti) (an) (I u botilia) (NU FU frakti) (an) (I u botilia) (NU DU PA frakti) (an) (I u botilia) (DU TO frakti) (an)

I think it may not allways necessary to mark the object when the order SVO is the respected rule. The language IDO use a seeming system for the “accusative” , special end of word or particule before give the same logical meaning.

Saluta Daniel

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: [glosalist] word order - Committee on language planning, FIAS. Coordination: Vergara & Hardy, PhDs.