Marcos skripted:
 
> Well, these features (I won't say "changes" cause the language is just
> on development) on Novial direction are:=20
> -   -s ending for plurals
 
This is a very strong point of the Novial system.  Remember to insert
an -e- after a consonant, though!
 
> -   -e -a -o -u endings for nouns.
 
I presume you have -e for epicene (common sex), -o/a for masc/fem,
and -u for things.  Why not also take the Novial -um for abstracts?
Actually, I see no need to separate concrete objects from living beings:
the distinction is not clear in the case of animals (as in E when we
speak of someone's cat as "it" and get told off), and there are more
names for concrete things (and animals) in Novial ending in -e than
there are for people, so -e in reality is not associated in my
mind in Novial with people as opposed to things anyway.  For these reasons
I have simply -e and -um, with the former for everything but abstracts.
(The construction LI -UM replaces Ido LO -A, just as Novial LI -IS
replaces Ido LE -A  -- one def article instead of three!)
 
> -   -i ending for adjetives.
> -    -im ending for adverbs.
 
Excellent.  I've been thinking about the Occ -men for adverbs.  One
objection is that I want to use the same ending on prepositions as on
adjs, and though I disagree with J that -im is too heavy for that, I
think -men might be a bit too much.  Also, -men is fiddly, in that one
naturally wants to write NATURALMEN, but on the other hand RAPIDIMEN,
and -im has the advantage that one doesn't have to hesitate whether to
insert the -i-.  This also means that the adj -i is always retained,
so that the adj marker is present even in the derived adv.  Also, J
pointed out that Wahl's -men was not found in any national language.
But then, what of J's -tem ending?  In what language is TEM found
without the -P ?  In fact, TEME in Novial means "theme", not "time"!
 
> -    alphabet. Finally, there will be no c nor z. It was a brave step
> on a naturalistic language like Novial to renounce to them. It is a
> due on a less naturalistic, more global IAL like Auxa.
 
Novial was not a naturalistic language, even in its later forms (although
it moved in that direction).  I would rather use Jacob's classification
and call N a mixed language.  I agree that C is too problematic to find
a place in the definitive system, but I would think again on Z.
Consider: SONE, SERO, SEBRA.  In what languages is S ever pronounced
[z] word-initially?
 
> By the way, I will not leave indefinite ending on verbs, as Novial
> does. That doesn't help on clarity, and BTW, I think verbs are the
> weakest point in Novial.
 
The four N verb endings are necessary for the -ione suffix.  And, if
you use Ido for long enough, you will realize what happens when there
is no -ione suffix.  Of course, -ione presents problems of its own, but
on the whole I now side with inclusion of -ione.  Its exclusion is
something I could accept, however.
 
> Auxa will end verbs with:
> -ai     present
> -ei     past
> -oi     future
> -ui     conditional
> Stress will normally fall on before-last vowel/dythong, but verbs get
> stress on last vowel/dypthong so they go -Ai, -Ei, -Oi, -Ar etc.
> As a kind of confession, I must say that I wanted some of that kind of
> dypthongic endings for my language. I just like them a lot, and they
> are very usual on the two biglangs: Chinese and English. I found that
> verbs were a perfect group for aplying that endings, and (coming from
> Espo/Ido) they permited me to use -s ending for another job, for the
> best job there is for it: plurals.
 
I would steer clear of diphthongs wherever possible.  They are harder
for many people than the simple vowels.
 
> There are some verb particles for perfect, passive, imperative tenses.
> They are ha, ge, fa. Perhaps tu for infinitive, but for now it'll be
> -ar.
> I'm thinking about including a subjunctive particle.
> =46or participles I go onto Esp/Ido -nt- -t-.
 
N has the same, of course, except that it has -ent after -i and -u.
 
> And making use of -a -e -o -u endings, I've developed and interesting
> table of personal pronouns. The usual one is:
>
>           la                las
> me   ve    le      mes   ves    les
>           lo                los
>           lu                lus=09
>
> Well, I suppose you who know something of Novial understand it. I
> won't explain it so.
> But there is an extended version of it:
>
> ma      va      la      mas     vas     las
> me      ve      le      mes     ves     les=09
> mo      vo      lo      mos     vos     los
> mu      vu      lu      mus     vus     lus
>
> Well, you catch it, don't you?  Yes, it's an all-purpose table of
> pronouns, he, he. For example, "vu" only for talking to things or
> animals, but what if you employ vu when talking to a person? Well, a
> subtle way to "pester" someone. And what about "Mo amai va" and "Ma
> amai vo"? Doesn't it sound romantic? And what about "Mo amai vo"? Hu,
> he, he. This is becoming and kind of artlang :-)
 
This is what I would call an embarras de richesse.  It looks like
the Esp/Ido table of participles, which E S Pankhurst was right to
criticize (though she wasn't right on much else).
 
James Chandler
[log in to unmask]