Bob wrote:
>I prefer to stay with what is a proven winner, and make the internal
>changes as
>already proven,
>versus dropping Occidental for going to ILa which uses 90% of Occidental, i=
n
>order to get the 1
>0% that makes it easier for a Romance speaker to use.
 
As this is your picture you are acting rationally. It is not the idea I
have of the differences.
 
And then:
>For instance the infinitives in ILa end in -ar, -er, -ir.
>Guess what they are in Occidental?
 
The fact is that both Occidental and Interlingua have one infinitive -r,
which is added to the verbal theme, which in both language can end in -a,
-e, -i.
 
So the verb _ama_ means _love(s)_.
(Especially for English speakers it would be much better to present the
verbs in the present tence. Then it would be easier for them not to
confound the infinitive and present tence, which does occur, not only in
Auxiliary Languages. )
 
>In ILa to say He (has)liked the book is:
>Ille ha amate le libro, The Occidental is:
>Il amat li libre. Or, Il ha amat li libre.
 
An other way of saying it in Interlingua is:
_Le libro le ha placite_.
He has _loved_ the book I would render as.
_Ille ha _amate_ le libro_.
 
I think one has to admit that as Occidental does not shun from artificial
words, it can well use the past and perfect forms in _t_. They are
recognized in an "impressionistic" way by speakers of many European
languages.
>
 
>Now, does amate look more like a romance language than amat?
 
That depends which Romance language you are thinking of, but I would like
to take up another point.
 
I think there is a value in the preterite/imperfect is distinct from the
Perfect, but I can well imagine that some persons on this list would have
another opinion about that. The fact is though that interlingua has a
distinct past/preterite/imperfect (pick your favourite) form.
 
It is possible that Romance speakers might have difficulties with the
Occidental -t in _Il amat li libre_, but I think they can soon find out the
correct meaning.
 
>I think so. There are better words to compare perhaps, but the -t ending us=
ed
>the way it is, and -nt, etc. compared to the verbal endings of ILa for futu=
re,
>past, etc.
>For instance, scribeva versus scrit, a favorite word to criticize in Occ.
This is an interesting example you are giving there, because the Occidental
form _scri_ is much more Romance than the Interlingua ditto, which is more
_Latin_. Like this:
Interlingua: scribe, scription; scriptura; subscription; transcription
Occidental: scri; scrition; scriture; subscription ? transcription ?
Compared to some other languages:
English: write(s); writing, scripture; subscription, transcription
=46rench: =E9cri- + s/t/etc.; =E9criture; souscription, transcription
Italian: scrive [o, -i, e, -iamo...?; scrittura etc., --- trascrizione
Spanish: escribe (o, e etc), escriptura, subscripci=F3n; transcripci=F3n
German: schreibe etc. Schreiben; Schrift; Subskription; Transkription
Russian: pish- u, esh etc; ---; shrift; --- ; transkriptsiya
 
In Interlingua, the learner has to remember just _one_ root, and putting on
the endings to it. This solution seams better, as the root _scrib-_ is what
you always need. It is the international form, which you may well find in
scientific vocabulary.
 
The Occidental form is short and looks very naturalistic.
What one prefer may well be a matter of taste.
 
> Does
>it here look
>more or less romancified than ILa? Or,
>dormiva versus dormant?
 
Interlingua: dormiva, ha dormite, dormiente
Occidental: dormit, ha dormit, dormant ?
 
Does Occidental have all its present participles ending in _ant_?
 
>In Ila:
>Illes habera arrivate. =3D They will have arrived versus Occ (I think) Ili
>va har arrivat. (Har is Scandinavian _present tence_)
>Ili ha arrivat. =3D They have arrived. In Interlingua this is:
Illes ha arrivate.
>
>We could list a whole slew of longer sentences of Ila and Occ, and if we th=
en
>wrote the same sentence in Spanish below them the difference would stand ou=
t
>more, and one would see ILa is much closer to Spanish/Port. etc. than
>Occidental
>is.
On the surface Interlingua looks very Spanish, but when you have come a bit
further, you will see that this is not at all so. For what you see are the
endings _-as, -os etc. but interlingua _folios_ is mor international than
Spanish _hojas_ and Interlingua _ferro_ is more recognizable than Spanish
_hierro_ (but they have the word _ferrocarril_ (if you didn't know).
 
>For, Occidental is an international language including romance words, versu=
s
>being a romance language based on romance words. The difference may seem
>subtil,
>but it is a major difference between the two languages. And, what makes
>ILa work
>as good as it does is because of the majority of Occidental in ILa.
 
No problem, you just start using Occidental and we will see. I may be
wrong, and then it is much better that Occidental is tested, once more,
than not. We have different opinions there, depending from different
experiences and different places on Earth.
 
If you cannot se the positive things in Interlingua as compared to
Occidental, I cannot tell it to you. You have got to use tha language
extensively to see the flaws in Occidental in practice.
 
>It is not
>the other way round. Occidental has absolutely no ILa within it. ILa has us=
ed
>Occidental's overall method of success, and added latininisms and romantici=
sms
>to it and thus, actually, cut back the languages effectiveness a good
>percentage
>by not handling the other language groups that Occ. handles very well.
 
Should I, do you think, believe your observations, rather than my own?
 
What is the good thing having lots of language groups represented in the
language. If my memory has not stopped working, one of the stronger points
of critique from the Occidental group against Esperanto was that Esperanto
was not consistent enough. La moshto klopodis manghi la bulkon was not
quite de Wahl's teacup.
 
>Then, take a look at Occidental's suffixes, along with ILa's and then look =
at
>Spanish suffixes, and then tell me ILa is not more romanticized than
>Occidental.
 
I have been taking many looks at both Spanish, Interlingua and Occidental
suffixes, but I must have missed something there.
 
When I started learning Interlingua I compared suffixes in Swedish, and
Polish, German. The foreign words in those languages. I can do that for you
- and include Spanish suffixes as well, but it will take time.
 
Sleepingly yours
 
[log in to unmask]
Kjell Rehnstroem
Vaenortsgatan 87
S-752 64  UPPSALA
Svedia - Sweden