On 3/8/15, Kjell Rehnström <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Stephen Rice skrev den 2015-03-07
> 17:00:
>> My usual tweaks for Novial begin with the 28 version and the Lexike.
>> *I would like to change <x> to <ks> throughout, as the current system
>> will lead to *axelera, axente, etc. This is a low-priority tweak,
>> however.

> In my view Novial 28/30, I
> understand that this is the Book
> and the Lexike. I feel it is good
> as is.

It's passable as is. There are aspects that will needlessly hamper
learning and use, and J's own reforms weren't helpful. In the case
above, for example, it's practically a foregone conclusion that some
people will write *axelera instead of akselera, because [ks] > <x>.
It's a fairly minor point, but easily fixed. (He was no doubt misled
by a superficial reference to Ido, which has <x>. But in Ido there is
a "soft" <c> as well, so theoretically <kc> won't be misheard as
[ks]/<x>.) A gentler solution might be to simplify <cc>/[ks] >
<s>/[s]: ?aselera, ?asente, a process found in some Romance languages.
Then remaining instances of [ks] would be realized as <x>. I would be
tempted to extend this to <x> as well, that is, to all instances of
[ks], because <x> tends to occur before other consonants anyway. But
that would probably be too much.

The changes to the verb system are more important. It can be difficult
to remember when, to preserve a derivational form, the verb will end
in something other than -a. For that matter, he sometimes has -a where
I would expect something else. Just level it.

There may again be a slightly less jarring solution here: I reject
-ione not only because it complicates the derivational system for no
good reason, but also because J himself is hard put to define the
form. But if, as far as possible, we begin with the noun, we would not
have to define -ione forms derivationally: we could just accept the
usual meaning and back-derive the verb. So we could start with
expeditione and back-derive expedi, and so on.

Shifted tense is very difficult for people to learn who haven't grown
up with it, and it sometimes confuses people who have. Drop it.

As for the concrete and
> abstract 3d person I have
> capitulated and think it may work.
> The only tweaking I can imagine for
> the time being is to go against
> Jespersen and use lumes, lumsen
> instead of lun, luns (IIRC).

I missed two tweaks:

1. To tidy up the pronoun/gender system, use -um (pl -umes) for the
conceptual neuter and -u for regular neuter.

2. Eliminate the infinitive marker (tu, needed for "that thing") by
using either the definite article (when the infinitive is a regular
NP) or de (when it is connected to another element). Thus, "Vida es
kreda" could be stated more verbosely as "Li vida es li kreda." In my
example text, "li povo tu vida" would become "li povo de vida."

> is presedence in after > aftru;
> hinder > hintru. To change "even"
> to "mem" just because the stress
> will be unacceptable is not
> necessary. In a normal sentence
> "even" is often unstressed, as I
> understand, and then one can boldly
> keep it.

These points don't particularly bother me, and I see no reason to change them.

I'm not that interested in rebooting Novial, though I might try it out
of curiosity. But the tweaks indicate what such a reboot would look