Print

Print


--- On Sat, 10/18/08, Paul Bartlett <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Yes, I consider Interglossa and Glosa to be quite distinct
> languages.
> Having had the opportunity to study both, I think that
> Clark and Ashby
> transmuted IG into a significantly different language (to
> some extent
> relexified English without articles), despite the
> superficial
> resemblances of vocabulary.  Although I was for some time
> involved to
> some extent with Glosa, I later gave it up as considering
> it inferior
> to other conIAL projects, including Interglossa itself.  To
> me one of
> the most ingenious aspects of IG was its verb system, which
> it shared
> to some extent with Basic English (which I otherwise
> consider to be
> basically fraudulent).
> 
For those unfamiliar with IG, imagine a form of Basic English NOT based on English as such--not a "simplified" English but grammatically autonomous. All verb constructions are reduced to phrasal verbs using (IIRC) about 18 verboids. These phrasal verbs are very systematic and predictable, not idiomatic. It's one of the best "concept" auxlangs ever, along with Novial.

Steve

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com