>> cake = owafyby = "noun happy foam food"

Paul O. BARTLETT wrote:

>    Why not some kinds of whipped pudding?

Pudding is soft solid (yke) rather than foam (yfy).

pudding = okakeby == okaeby = "noun weak soft solid food"

>    Recently Koboseya, the "Kobold" language was announced at
> (all the explanations are in French
>at the moment).  A few words have an initial vowel, but otherwise all
>words are CV syllables of varying numbers.  The vocabulary is based on
>871 (I think it is) roots, with a number of lexical affixes.  I haven't
>looked at it in depth, but it seems to me to be more attractive than
>Ygyde and less confusing.  I am not necessarily advocating Koboseya,
>only that an easily pronounceable language can apparently be built up
>of a manageable number of roots and affixes that is not so restricted
>as Ygyde's.

All 881 Kobold roots are four letters long, which means that its
compound words are very long. Here is Kobold text from the front

  Guteviniyesu xoratu wemewa.
  Xi asikeyese geye yohoza koboseyawa,
  yesa diyalegeyesu topoza wemewa :
  yexa gegonoyuse reba kokazuza yesewa...

Here is example of Ygyde text:

  eki egi iny any eba ujima uwy ydebe.
  any ina eki eba ujude ygyde.

The most common Ygyde words are short and easy to pronounce.
You are biased against Ygyde.

>    As applied to constructed languages, "a priori" actually has two
>slightly different uses.  The first use is a vocabulary is built on a
>classification scheme of some kind.  Notable examples are Real
>Character, Ro, and Oz.  I myself honestly do not think that they are
>workable, for several reasons...

The Real Character and Ro are taxonomic languages; they resemble the
Dewey Decimal Classification System used in libraries. Ygyde is a
compound language; its compound words are made of short roots.

>> I like to talk about compound languages because
>> their potential has not been fully explored yet.

>    I think that they have been tested and found wanting.

I have not seen enough proof that they are inferior.
Ygyde is still the best of them and it does not have
major flaws. Perfect compound words are not possible
because they would be too long.

>> Ygyde is not protected by copyright, so anyone can make his
>> own Ygyde-like language.

>    Does that mean that I can design my own language and call it Ygyde?

Yes, you can. If you call it Ygyde, you should make it similar to
Ygyde, so you can claim that it is an improved version of Ygyde.
Otherwise you will confuse other conlangers. It takes thousands
of hours to make a conlang as sophisticated as Ygyde, but improving
an existing language is much easier.