Print

Print


At 02:23 AM 11/1/98 +0000, charles wrote:
>Robin Gaskell wrote:
>
>> >>I have seen people write e.g. Glosa-pe.  But is pe the word for "people",
>> >>or an affix?  Are we being misled by the writing convention, in other
>> >>words, would we think pe was an affix if we wrote: Glosa pe ?
>
*   "pe" is a lexical category affix, an abbreviation that is joined with a
hyphen.  In Persian, they use "i" to mean "person of the"; "pe" in Glosa
has a similar meaning.  "Baha" in Persian means "Glory": "Bahai" or Baha-i"
is a description meaning "person of the Glory"; this could be rendered into
Glosa as Baha-pe.
 
   [  ...........................  ]
>> perhaps Glosa, in the 21st Century, is re-inventing
>> the "hyphen".
>
>The hyphen is fine, and can definitely be heard if one
>defines it to be a supra-segmental morpheme representation.
>Compounding is a necessary part of Glosa, replacing adverbs
>and derivation.
>
*   Nice to hear.
 
>Using two different forms for person seems silly to me,
>just take the high-frequency compounders like "pe"
>and use them as first-class words as well.
>
*   They are not two words: _pe_ is too short for the full word
representing the important status of "person"; it carries the value of
"person" when attached to another word that confers a title or occupational
category, much like "-er" or "-or" in English.  Similarly _posta-an_ =
postman .. if we can still be sexist (or just plain accurate) in Glosaland;
_posta-pe_ of course would be more PC.
    "Gaskell's Law of Time", expounded years ago, suggests that people take
some mental space to register concepts, and that words do need some length
to give them recognisability and their own rhythm.  If each word was the
length of an abbreviation, not only would we run out of two letter
combinations very quickly, but w'ed also lose the colour and rhythm of
speech, and language would become boring and quite taxing to listen to.
    _pe_ and _an_ are both too featurureless to do justice to their
subjects: this, of course, is pseudo psychological guff that goes beyond
the Law of Time, but, which I believe, at the 'gut sensation' level, to be
true.
 
>Still, the noun-verb juncture is poorly (not at all)
>marked which makes reading difficulter than necessary;
>my guess is that if I used it I would always insert
>auxiliary "pa" or "nu" just for that reason. Similarly,
>clause juncture semicolons are wholly inadequate.
>
*   I will agree that in the Present Tense, with no tense particle starting
the Verb Phrase, you might miss it, but I feel we have to be descriptive
enough in Glosa to guide the listener/reader around the discourse/text.
Rhythm and vocal stress are aids to spoken Glosa, and the semicolon was
supposed to be adequate as the 'start of clause' marker, while commas, we
thought, separating phrases gave sufficient clues to sentence geography.  I
must post more Glosa text on Auxlang to give you a chance to poke holes in it.
 
>But look at the bright side - people don't complain
>unless they are serious about buying the product.
>Glosa is still the only popular pidgin-like IAL.
>
*   Very kindly put, thank you.
 
Saluta,
 Robin