Print

Print


I've given a cursory look at James' grammar.
 
Let me first say that anything I criticize here is to be understood to repre-
sent _my_own_ position. It has not been run by any member of the NRG for
comments.
 
Some of the changes (e. g. unifying adverbs under -im, as well as _va_ for a
future tense marker) coincide with changes we've made. In the case of _va_,
it's one J did not like and explicitly wrote against in AIL. But yet it seems
to be a very popular choice: the LJN adopted it, and it was one of the few
cases where I was outvoted by the NRG. (The actual vote was an absolute tie,
even after distributing preferences. When Thomas Leigh returned from vacation,
he was prevailed upon to break the tie, and _va_ was adopted by a 6-5 vote.)
 
There are some ways in which JC makes changes that I _personally_ would like,
though _we_ as a group went differently. One of these is -e replacing -u for
concrete neuters. I actually feel N30 (and GN) make too many distinctions, but
there are members who _like_ the precision that this gives, and I have tended
to accept that any decision that _someone_ thinks worth making ought to be
capable of being made. As a result this is one place where our decision allowed
for personal flexibility. (This was  one case where Thomas Leigh came up with
an idea that prevented a possible break-up of the group. I'm glad that he was
able to find an acceptable compromise.) But despite the fact that the group
went differently, if it were a one-person project, my grammar would probably
agree with James here.
 
One place James and I differ diametrically, I note, is his desire to increase
the proportion of verbs with -a stems, while I think that it ought to be, if
anything, _decreased_. But this is an issue about which the NRG is sharply
_divided_, and as a result, GN will have very few stem-vowel changes as compared
with N30.
 
All in all, I do not think James' language to be a very bad idea. I could
probably live with it as well as I could live with N30 unchanged. I am rather
critical of the large number of places where he provides for optional forms,
but I have to remind myself that Jespersen himself believed in providing
options and letting usage work the issues out. I'm willing to concede James'
system more legitimacy as a Novial variant than he is willing to concede
ours, I believe.
 
                                Bruce R. Gilson
                                email: [log in to unmask] or [log in to unmask]
                                IRC: EZ-as-pi
                                WWW: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3141
                                (for language stuff: add /langpage.html)