Print

Print


> > What is the status of the effort to combine the best features
> > of Ido with Novial??
>
>     I am curious as to what you might think are the "best features"
> to be combined.
 
Otto Jesperson was involved to some significant degree in
the 1907 version of Ido. He was the leading figure of his
time in the general field of mainstream linguistics. He
"wrote the book" on IALs. And when he tried to clean up
Ido he came up with Novial ...
 
Unfortunately, he went too far in the direction of
Euro-"naturalism" at the expense of Eo's schematicism.
I think either Occidental or IALA's Interlingua do
better at naturalism for Europeans, but neither is
particularly easy for the average American, still less
so for non-westerners. The "naturalistic" exceptions,
unconscious euroclone assumptions, redundant vocabulary,
and above all the relatively complex syntax makes
all euroclones suspect for a wider audience.
 
The winning IAL must have simple syntax like Asian langs.
It must have a minimal easy to learn and pronounce
vocabulary. I don't know about morphology, whether
tis nobler to agglutinate or isolate, but preservation
of the euro-naturalistic derivations is a mistake.
 
The Ido vocab is a good start, not perfect but better
than any other I know of, for world IAL use. It very
much resembles that of Glosa, by the way, in its roots.
But it could likely be improved greatly, as I thought
James Chandler was promising to do, perhaps by starting
from the Novial Lexike side ... ?
 
At any rate, if Ido can be improved 20% by some ideas
from Novial or anywhere else, it will reach my personal
"good enough" rating, which no IAL has reached yet.