Print

Print


On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 11:11:39 +0900, MacLeod Dave <[log in to unmask]> 
wrote:

>I forgot to mention here that I made a quick 8-page 'magazine' in LFN
>the end of last month and intend to continue. Here's where you can
>read it:
>
>http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dc93rc8z_3tc2tc6
>
>It's more of an ongoing test right now than anything. I think I'm
>going to include English translations in some parts of the next one to
>allow people to compare the two and learn the language.

A couple questions:

1. Are they actually open to such things at Google?

2. I have some problems with LFN. I like the theory, but

a. I wish the vocabulary could grow in a more structured fashion, not 
neologizing left and right. Start with a basic vocabulary of a thousand 
words or so and add as needed.

b. I *really* wish they'd drop the cutesy folk-etymologies from the 
lexicon. We have "posable" (which should mean "pose-able") for possible. 
When I asked Boeree about this, he said that -able was the suffix of 
potential (Eo/Ido -ebla). Great. So presumably Ido should have "posebla" 
instead of "posibla," and both Eo and Ido should have "probebla." 
Likewise "leteratur" instead of the earlier "literatura." I like a laugh, 
but let's cut the comedy.

Comments?

Steve