2013/1/18 Jim Henry <[log in to unmask]>:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 6:27 AM, Mathieu Roy <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> What are the advantages of speaking a less logical language (a language with grammar rules with a lot of exceptions, a lot of words with ambiguity, etc.)?
> [*] -- Esperanto isn't a loglang or engelang in the strict sense, nor
> is it perfectly unambiguous, but I'd say it's less ambiguous than the
> natlangs I'm most familiar with in both syntax and lexicon.

Maybe we should make a distinction between regularity and unambiguity.

BTW, I think that I have already heard someone saying that there is an
advantage of irregular verbal forms as they become more audibly
distinguishable from each other.

For instance, each one of the Spanish expressions
"yo soy, tú eres, usted es, nosotros somos, vosotros sois, ustedes son"
are better distinguished from each other than
"yo es, tú es, usted es, nosotros es, vosotros es, ustedes es".

But I doubt it's a great advantage since many languages work perfectly
well with no person conjugation. Besides, some languages tend to omit
the pronouns as they are implicit in the conjugations, what sometimes
make distinguishability harder again. For instance, in "soy, eres, es,
somos, sois, son", the words "soy", "somos", "sois" and "son" sound
similar and could again be interpreted as a regular verb "so-" with
pronouns postponed:

soy = so-y = {to be} + {I}
somos = so-mos = {to be} + {we}
sois = so-is = {to be} + {you plural}
son = so-n = {to be} + {they}

I wonder if verb person conjugation originated from incorporation of
ancient pronouns...

>  Wordplay
> in Esperanto works in at least two ways: using words that sound
> similar to other words (this method is also available in most
> engelangs, I reckon), and words which are phonologically identical to
> other words but have a different parse (this is unavailable in
> engelangs with self-segregating morphology, which I think is most of
> them).
> --
> Jim Henry