Print

Print


On Wed, 25 Feb 1998 14:04:39 -0800, "Bruce R. Gilson" <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
 
 
>>I understand that.  Marcos' native language is not English; this says =
you'd
>>especially like to hear from such people.
>
>True. And I still wish we had more such people. When we have, in =
general, had
>non-native-English speakers, unfortunately, they have tended to be =
people
>unsympathetic to our goal, such as Kjell Rehnstroem and Marcos Franco. =
We did
>have, until just recently, Jay Bowks on the list and some of his =
insights have
>been useful. But even he was not truly committed to the goal toward =
which we
>are headed.
 
Now, don't you catch the message yet? "Every non-native-English
speaker abandons N98": couldn't this mean that N98 is unacceptable for
non-E-natives? Are non-English's viewpoints being taken into account
in N98? Has -r ending been accepted by any romance speaker as a
passable feature?
 
 
>Of course, the words were written at a time when no other Novial-based =
IAL was
>being considered. However, I think that any reasonable interpretation of=
 the
>words "and so forth" in the above paragraph would include the case of =
arguing
>the merits of another complete proposal (for this is what Marcos was =
doing, not
>a discussion of one or another feature to be included)
 
Ok, now you say I did not include a discussion about one or another
feature, but a complete proposal. Then, I violated no rule, cause I
did not open a debate on any feature in particular, but on a complete
proposal. But you are wrong again, cause I didn't present a complete
proposal (as another language different of N98), but a schem which
works over a series of features.
 
 
>There are, at this point, a number of questions for reopening before the
>proposal. When we request the reopening of a question, we do not attempt=
 to
>persuade, we merely say we _have_ a question to reopen. If Marcos had =
stated
>that he wanted to reopen the question of the -r ending for verbs, I =
guarantee
>that no more than one vote besides his own would have been cast to =
reopen it,
>knowing the composition of the group. If Marcos had done it this way, he=
 would
>have _seen_ that there was no sympathy for his idea, and we would have =
been
>spared a lot of angry posting.
 
In fact, the only angry posting came from you. And about the question
of the -r ending for verbs, this is not what I opened. I opened a
question about a new schem of direct derivation, which I presented to
the list. Lacking of -r is just one of it's features. Fixed -ed for
past is another one, which I like very much. Etc.
 
 
 
Saludos,
Marcos