Re: [glosalist] Discrepancies : No-gru

proto , mi pa amo u tu glosa - mi pa habe u no no-facili in logi

id - mi posi detekti plu “subject, verb, object” ko no

no-facili e fo tako . u-la du es u examina proba de u internatio

lingua . u stru pa es fo boni . mi du pluso habe plu no-facili ko plu lexiko e pa tenta ergo mo

quo-lo u mo verba in u sti lingua du eqa u solo mo in glosa .

exempla - u english verba “Like” posi semani “amo”, “homo”,

“probabili” . si vi pa grafo “like” e questio pro id in glosa , vi sio gene

\?ing?ness?ly? so vi sio muta u verba a “likeing”, “likeness” alo

“likely” e gene “amo”, “homo” alo “probabili”.

first, i liked your glosa - i had no difficulty understanding it -

i could work out the subject, verb object sections with no

difficulty and very quickly - that is a test of an international

language . the construction was very good . i also have problems

with the dictionaries and have tried to work out one where one

word in the starting language equals one word only in the next

language. for instance the english word “like” could mean love,

similar or probable. my personal dic has *like\?ing?ness?ly?] ie like = love, similar or probable - if you were to write like

and ask for it in glosa, you would get \?ing?ness?ly? so you would change it to likeing, likeness or likely and get amo,

homo or probabili.

*bark\?dog?tree?] *barkdog\voci] *barktree\kortika] *back\?ret?bod?] *backret\retro] *country\?country?side?nat?] *countrynat\landa] *countryside\rura] etc syd

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