Print

Print


At 00:59 22/2/98, Marcos Franco wrote:
..........
>In my project, I have unified all verbs, with the ending -A. Those
>ones ending in -I or -U are transformed to fit in the new scheme:
>puni => punita, distribu => distributa, evolu => evoluta, etc
>Those ending in -E just get the -A: opine => opina, lekte => lekta,
>etc.
 
'distributa' reminds me of what we normally do in English if we borrow
_directly_ from Latin, i.e. use the supine for the English verb: (to)
distribute.
 
>Now, for the -(t)ione matter, the suffix will be ever -atione. But
>there are an alternative form (-ione) for those verbs which formerly
>ended with -e -i -u (this is how we will keep the naturalistic form).
>We have not to learn which verbs are those of -ione suffix because
>they are the same as on our natlangs. Non-occidentals might use the
>-atione always. That will give non-euroclonic words from them as
>opinatione, distributatione, but I don't think that's problematic, and
>they would learn by practice where the -ione suffix is advisable.
 
But what if you used a system closer to English? The _uniform_ ending would
be simply -IONE.  For example if, say, the infinitive suffix was -ER (Im
*not* saying it should be), we would have:
 
distributer     distributione
evoluter        evolutione
lekter          lektione
skripter        skriptione
formater        formatione
etc.
 
We could even accommadate 'oddities' like:
opiner          opinione
 
This would leave no optionally irregular alternatives.
Just a thought.
 
>With this system (which is not perfect, but is the best I've found
>IMHO), we have got an uniform verbal -a, we have got the nice
>possibility of -ed as fixed preterite marker (instead of those
>unnatural -ad -od -ud),
 
So would my suggested scheme  :-)
 
>we have got -r as possible infinitive marker
>after -a, and we have got desappearance of shared endings (-e, -i,
>-u).
 
Just like my suggestion above.  :-)
 
[BRUCE]
>>>I do not like Marcus' solution, nor he mine. I am
>
>The only arguments I've heard for you Bruce to not liking my solution
>is that it goes on the opposite direction of yours. I don't think this
>is a strong argument.
 
Nor do I.  And from where I am, it doesn't seem that Marcos & Bruce are
going in _opposite_ directions.  BOTH have started from Novial; BOTH are
trying to bring in more schematicism, especially adding (fairly) consistent
PoS.  Or have I missed something?
 
On the other hand, both James Chandler & Jay Bowks do seem to be going in
an opposite direction, i.e. towards "more naturalism".
 
 
[ME]
>>I have no preferred solution of my own; partly because I yet to be
>>persuaded that (fairly) strict PoS marking is particularly desirable, and
>
>Could you explain more about your position in this matter, Ray?
>I think it would be interesting, in spite that I like strict PoS
>marking.
 
Basically because no natlang has felt the need for this.  Also, while the
traditional Graeco-Latin division of words into the traditional "parts of
speech" more or less still works for modern European languages (English, at
least, IMO is certainly straining it), they seem less than satisfactory on
a global basis.
 
The argument put forward for PoS marking is that they provide 'sign-posts'
to the 'sentence landscape'.  I think the judicious use 'particles' and
'pointer words' can do this better.
 
>>partly because I have desire to produce a Novial-based conIAL.
>
>Sorry?
 
Yes - *my* apologies are due, not yours. You are right to be puzzled by my
English.  I LEFT OUT A NEGATIVE - sorry.
 
It should have read:
"partly because I have NO desire to produce a Novial-based conIAL."
 
>>I merely ask that aguments for one's preferred scheme or against another's
>>preferred scheme be factual.
>
>I think that's helpfull for everyone. Thanks :-)
 
Me too - and not only helpful but also avoids unnecessary flames.
 
Good luck with your project, Marcos.
 
Ray.
 
=======================================================
Written in Net English
Humor not necessarily marked
No intentional misreprsentation of another's statements
 
Gerasko d'aei polla didaskomenos (SOLON)
=======================================================