Print

Print


Obviously I cannot explain this to you.
 
It does not _have_ to be latin particles. Some are good, others are too
Latin. It is necessary to have a balance between the Latin and "modern"
grammatical words (pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, subjunctions,
particles).
 
I do mind that you select other source languages, but it is nothing that I
can do to prevent it.  As far as I am concerned you may even call it
Interlingua if you like, but you cannot say that articles chosen from
Catalan or Roumanian are IALA:s Interlingua but rather Stan Mulaik's
Interlingua.
 
One can also say that using _mais_ instead of _ma_ you are trying to return
to the past against general usage nowadays.
 
A constructive suggestion would be that you use what is standard
interlingua and add explanations to those words that you think people don't
understand.
 
The positive outcome of this is obvious. Your Romance readership will
eventually learn the Latin and other particles, which will help them in
their further contacts with other interlinguans than you, people who don't
understand your recently extrapolated forms.
 
The more people have to learn versions of one grammatical cathegory the
more time it takes. Just an example:
 
It is not difficult to learn that the plural in interlingua is _-s_.
Example: un casa - cento casas. Un muschettero - tres (3) muschetteros. Le
tres muschetteros de Alexandre Dumas es un bon libro.
 
To learn all the Swedish plurals you will nead a couple of weeks.
 
The more we keep to standard usage the better it is for the spreading of
Interlingua. Those who really have to work in order to learn interlingua
must have the opportunity of learning such a form of the language that it
is rewarding for their continued life with interlingua and other languages,
which they will inevitably come in contact with. A well-balanced diet of
Latin Particles is recommended.
 
Quod Erat Demonstrandum
 
 
 
 
 
 
[log in to unmask]
Kjell Rehnstroem
Vaenortsgatan 87
S-752 64  UPPSALA
Svedia - Sweden