On 31 Oct 2007 at 1:20, MacLeod Dave wrote:
> I doubt that myself, actually. One other reason of mine (among
> for not liking wordlangs that much is that they take just enough
> just about every language to make it confusing for the language
> learner which words come from their language, and to what extent.
That's because they aren't using international words. Just words chosen at random with no
plan but their own opinion.
Occidental for instance does not choose words randomly from the languages it uses.
The minimum word must be in at least three languages to be considered at the bottom of the
totem pole in the category "international". A word in Occidental is not considered fully
international unless it can be found in a minimum of six language, and 8 or more is better.
However, on occasion, there is no international word to cover a concept. So, at that point, like
it or not, some word has to be chosen.
And, even though some talk about the above concepts, they still, based on results and
comments I have read here, they do not understand how the principle works.
Random choice of roots, or full words from other languages is not how to build a new IAL, nor
is it even close to how Occidental was built. Until someone understands that method clearly,
and it is extremely simple, they cannot enjoy the full excitement of what a stroke of genius de
Wahl gave us.