Re: Singular and Plural

— In glosalist@yahoogroups.com, “himalayanpussycat” maryannehanna@... = wrote:

I find that “plu” is used as a literal translation of “-s” (plu= ral). When I was learning English eons ago :-) I used to wonder, “What i= s this Western obsession with singular and plural?” As I began to spe= ak I gradually forgot about it.

I believe that in most naturally iso= lating languages where a noun is usually translated as singular, actual= ly contains plural meaning as well. They do not normally use “plu” equiv= alent particle, except when they want to stress it. I noticed some insta= nces of this in Glosa as well. E.g. mo bibli (one book), tri bibli (thre= e books); u flori (a flower), poli flori (many flowers). In these exampl= es the “noun” (without -s or plu) seems to be singular as well as plural= .

It seems to me, when I read the “18 steps”, that “u flori” is the equ= ivalent of “THE flower” and “plu flori” =3D “THE flowerS”. And it is a prob= lem when we want explain the Indefinite, because without article, we canno= t known where the verb group is stopped an where the name group of the obj= ect begin. A particle is necessary, and if we cannot use in Glosa a specia= l mark for introduce the object of the verb action, using an article defin= ite or indefinite is a way for eliminate the ambiguity. However, the using= of Plu and U for explain the indefinite article is not a good maner. It n= eed indefinite article OR “accusative mark”.

By other way, it is not possi= ble to get far away all rules unknowned in some natural language, all Glos= a may be walk to the trash. A language can forget any rules if it use othe= rs, and these naturaly are not existant in many others languages.

The tru= e question is : “can you easily said what you want to say in Glosa?”

Tout= es mes amiti=E9s Daniel