Print

Print


> >Eminent Idistes proposi inter altres:
> >1. Suppression del obligatori finales -o e -a.
 
> I think there is a problem about derivation if you don't have some standard
> endings for the open word classes, tho I am bound to say that the Esp-Ido
> endings are perhaps not the best that can be found.
 
Making them elidable "for poetry" certainly hasn't helped matters.
Penultimate stress pattern also leads to their disappearance.
For an IAL, make the rule and follow it 100%, or drop the rule.
 
> >2. Plurale per -s, quel es li maxim international.
>
> I personally would prefer a plural in -s, but that said -i is not without
> internationality and is certainly much more natural and practical than Esp
 
I think -s is inevitable, but it would be better to have
no obligatory number or tense. Perhaps IAL designers should
be forced to study East Asian languages, e.g. Bahasa Indonesia
and Mandarin, the world's most successful constructed langs.
 
> >4. Adverbies per -mente o -men.
>
> I would prefer Novial -im; in any case, -men is not really optimal in terms
> of internationality, is it?
 
As long as *all* adverbs get the same regular ending,
parsing of sentences containing unfamiliar words is easy.
There is no excuse for irregulars in a constructed lang.
A clear, simple distinction between prepositions and adverbs,
whether in morphology or syntax, is deperately needed.
 
> >5. Articul per li; la essent repugnant avan masculines.
>
> Again, point taken.  But all these things are interrelated.  li in Ido means
> "they" at the moment, so the whole system would have to be reoriented.
 
Who needs articles? They are confusing and totally useless,
assuming part-of-speech endings of some sort. Whereas in
Interlingua, which has no obvious indication of noun vs.
adjective vs. verb ... the "le" is almost your only clue.
 
> >7. Introduction del suffixe completmen international -ion.
>
> With what sense?  Why is this necessary?
 
Couturat's careful definitions do not seem workable to me.
Jesperson tried to distinguish various senses of the noun,
but I'm not sure this should be done. Esperanto is more
intuitive about this. Imagine trying to teach these fine
distinctions to 2nd language learners OR children.