LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for AUXLANG Archives


AUXLANG Archives

AUXLANG Archives


AUXLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

AUXLANG Home

AUXLANG Home

AUXLANG  July 2004, Week 1

AUXLANG July 2004, Week 1

Subject:

Re: AIOLA

From:

Rex May - Baloo <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

International Auxiliary Languages <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 1 Jul 2004 12:00:20 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (64 lines)

on 7/1/04 10:25 AM, Jacques Dehée at [log in to unmask] wrote:

> Aiola differs from Esperanto in the following ways:
>
> Phonetics:
> Aiola uses no superscripted letters which has proven to be the least
> favorable feature of Esperanto.
good.

> Also, Aiola has distinct letters names;
> Esperanto does not.
also good
>
> Lexicon:
> 1. The majority of Aiola's vocabulary is more familiar than Esperanto's
> vocabulary (to speakers of Romance languages). For example the Esperanto
> word for 'abbreviate' is 'mallongigi' - hardly recognizeable. The Aiola
> word for 'abbreviate' is 'abreviyare' - recognizeable to speakers of
> French, Italian, Spanish, Protuguese,English etc. We have encountered many
> other examples of this kind.
Bad, at least in this example.  "mallongigi" is easily understood.
Word-building of this sort is one of the best features of Eo.

> 2.Requisite to understanding spoken speech is the listener’s ability to
> determine when one word ends and another begins. Aiola makes this task
> considerably easier for its speakers by presenting a corpus of words that
> do not pose any confusion to the determination of word boundaries.
Sounds good.  But how does it work?  Are there word-shape rules as in
Loglan/Lojban/ceqli/guaspi?

> Esperanto does not. In Esperanto many words break up into possible
> Esperanto words making comprehension harder for the listener.
>
> Morphology:
> 1. Word endings in Aiola denote only the meaning indicated by the part of
> speech (e.g. noun, verb, adjective, etc). Additional meanings (utility,
> provision, cause, similarity, etc) must be indicated by an affix.
> Esperanto uses word endings to signify all of these which leaves a single
> word open to more than one interpretation.

Are you contrasting affixes with endings?
>
> 2.To resolve semantic ambiguities which arise in existing natural and
> artificial languages due to multiple meanings of affixes and word endings,
> Aiola uses affixes which have only one specific meaning. In Esperanto this
> is not true. Many affixes have more than one meaning. An example would be
> their suffix -um which is described to have a variety of meanings.

That's deliberate and makes sense.
>
> Semantics:
> In Aiola most words have one literal meaning. In Esperanto, many words
> have more than one meaning.

Examples?

--

Rex F. May (Baloo)
Daily cartoon at:
http://www.cnsnews.com/cartoon/baloo.asp
Buy my book at:
http://www.kiva.net/~jonabook/book-GesundheitDummy.htm

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options