> Any kind of system you come up with for borrowing words "equally" is 
> going to be arbitrary and won't be any more defensible than any other.

> The Loglan/Lojban is probably the most precise and rigorous of them 
> all, and the weakness is apparent.  Thing is, there's no obvious 
> paradigm for doing equal borrowing that everyone will say is superior 
> to any of the others. This is half art and half engineering.  

I've always found the Lojban method to be interesting although the
result seems to be that the recognizability of words is negligible at

> Too bad Da Vinci didn't put his mind to auxlanging.  Or did he?


> Anyhow, with Tceqli, I decided to settle on the word-shape first, and
> borrow words that happen to fit it, going to the biggest languages  
> first.  That has resulted in a fairly equal-appearing set of 
> vocabulary.

I did something similar with SASXSEK although I have since loosened up
the rules a bit.  I first started with phonotactics and phonology then
found roots to fit.  As I relaxed phonotactics a little and expanded the
phonology, I then added more roots while reassigning some existing ones.
This method often results in some very minor languages gaining
representation too because they no other words can be found to fit.

One thing that I have noticed is that the choice of word shape along can
isolate certain languages.  My design seems to lend itself well to
absorbing words from languages like Malay-Indonesian and Tagalog, but
I've noticed where Bantu word just don't fit well without being mangled
beyond recognition.

There are still quite a few words I'd like to find better choices for,
but overall I think I'm getting fairly good representation balanced with
a wide variety.  There is still a lot of work left.

dejnx nxtxr / Dana Nutter