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.

> 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

> 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.



Rex F. May (Baloo)
Daily cartoon at:
Buy my book at: