> > 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.