> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Steve Rice > On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 21:49:17 -0400, [log in to unmask] wrote: > > >Actually I will say E-o is more complicated than it needs to be. I > >think Ido addressed some of the basic redundancies by eliminating > >things like adjective-noun agreement, and providing clearer sex > >markers. > > But it isn't particularly hard to set up an ambiguity with adjectives in Ido, > especially since they allow adjectives before or after the noun. For example, Yes, this is a problem with the "free" word order, and precisely what I was trying to demonstrate. Note that Esperanto's markers reduce these possibilities because "rakonto" would be "rakonton", so the presence or absence of the "-n" on "bela" would clarify which word it was qualifying. > Me rakontis al studentino bela rakonto. > > What does that mean? Is it > > 1. I told the pretty student a tale, or > 2. I told the student a pretty tale ? > > I suspect it's the second (and in speech I could probably > tell from cues not represented in writing). It should also be noticed that the stricter word order of English also keeps things in order without a marker, but even using poetic license to put the adjective afterward, we would still have the articles to break things up. I told the student pretty a tale. I told the student a tale pretty.