Andrew Nowicki wrote: AN> The root words must be made in such a way that An> it is clear where is the beginning and the end AN of each root word. "H. S. Teoh" wrote: HST> Why? This is the same problem as recognizing where one word ends and another word begins. Novice speakers of English are lost when they listen to fast spoken English. AN> The most important decision is how many AN> root words you need. HST> I'm not sure I understand the rationale HST> behind this. I can see a reason behind HST> limiting the number of root words used HST> in common, everyday conversations (learn HST> a small number of roots and you'll HST> understand most of what people say). But HST> putting an upper limit on root words in HST> the entire language seems to me something HST> that will only hamper the language's HST> development and ultimately, acceptance. HST> People who have mastered the basics will HST> say, "why can't I coin new roots? It's too HST> repetitive to keep using these long words!" We agree that consonant clusters are not desirable. Consider a language that has only two letters long root words. There are only two options: vowel-consonant (VC) or consonant-vowel (CV). Three letters long root words must be either CVV or VVC. CVC will result in consonant clusters. VCV has lots of vowels, but few consonants. It sounds nice, but there are few vowels in any alphabet, so the total number of VCV root words is much smaller than the total number of CVC root words. Another problem with VCV and CVC is that they may be confused with two letters long root words -- you would not know where the root words begin and end. For that reason CVC and VCV root words must not be mixed with CV and VC root words. VC and VCC roots can be used in the same word. The same is true of CV and CVV roots. At present Ygyde uses only CV roots but it can be extended with CVV roots. The total number of CV and CVV roots is on the order of one thousand. What do you do when you need more roots? You are in big trouble. You cannot mix CV and CVCV roots because nobody will know if CVCV is one root or two roots. CVVV sounds pathetic to me. It is the end of the rope! HST> So back to languages... I'm not saying HST> you have to invent an entire culture for HST> Ygyde -- but just an underlying philosophy, HST> or a motto, or something, that is reflected HST> in the more difficult parts of the language. HST> Then you don't *need* artificial restrictions HST> like the number of root words, etc.. Languages HST> do, and *will*, change. Even artificial HST> languages will change -- people always adapt HST> language to their own cultural context. HST> You cannot control a language by enforcing HST> grammatical or lexical rules. just look at HST> how futile the efforts of language reformers HST> are. In spite of efforts to "fix" so-called HST> incorrect pronunciation of English (esp. in HST> places where English is not a native language), HST> Malay, etc., people still continue to HST> "mispronounce" them. You can reform the HST> language of one generation, but the children HST> will inevitably change it to their own HST> tastes, and there's nothing you can do to HST> stop them. But you *can* guide a language HST> with an underlying philosophy, or motto, HST> which people can pick up very quickly while HST> learning the language. It is easy to change pronunciation and add more root words, but it seems impossible to change the meaning of existing root words or to change Ygyde's prefix table. Well, we could easily include longer compound words in the prefix table, but other changes of the prefix table would require increasing the number of vowels from 6 to 9. The prefix table *is* the philosophy of Ygyde. Those who make the compound words may invent taxonomical rules, but as you have pointed out, these rules result in very similar names of vegetables.