Print

Print


Charles wrote:
> =
 
> Ken Caviness wrote:
> =
 
> > If I understand correctly, if an Occidental noun ends in -e, the -e
> > often is dropped, and likewise the final -i on adjectives which end w=
ith
> > -i.
> =
 
> Yes, exactly. Of course it should only be dropped when the meaning
> is clear. The need for POS marking decreases as reliance on syntax
> (I just mean word order) increases. Unlike Czech and Latin and
> Esperanto, with their extremely free word order, Occidental is
> basically just plain verb-object and preposition-object, following
> the common pattern of European languages of the past millenium.
> =
 
> But since OCC is naturalistic and "open", one can only obtain
> loose compliance with neat grammatical rules (such as Ido has).
> In Glosa and Interlingua one can get by with very few grammatical
> clues such as articles and distinctive endings; my own preference
> is for more, as in Ido. OCC is only half-"schematic". Example:
> =
 
> : Essente de baltic origine e vivente li hiverne in Petersburg
> : e li estive in Estonia, mi ja de puerin et=E0 hat occasion
> : parlar quar lingues: russ, german, estonian, e frances
> =
 
I would have expected an adjectival ending on essente. In fact this text =
does
not distinguish parts of speech more than Interlingua does. Look:
 
Essente de origine baltic e vivente le hebernes in Petersburg e in le est=
ates
in Estonia, ego jam de mi pueritia habeva le occasion parlar quatro lingu=
as:
russo, germano, estonian e francese. =
 
 
In my edial language I would have:
Ego, essenti baltic de origin e veventi in li inverne in Petersburg e li =
estat
in Estonia, jam de mi puerini etat havet li occasion parlar quadri lingue=
s,
russe, germane, estoniane e francese. =
 
 
(In my ideal language names of languages should be nouns, so no -li angle=
si (lingue.)
 
> The recognizable endings "-nte, -ic, -e, -ia, -in, -t, -ion,
> -ar, -s" indicate POS in about half of the words, most of the
> rest being grammatical particles, which *no* IAL marks for POS.
> This is fairly typical of most natural languages as well.
> Obviously, it requires more than 5 vowels or 8 parts of speech
> to analyze any language seriously ...
>
A thing that surprizes me is that Occidental has _hiverne_ for _winter_, =
but
_verne_ for _spring_. I would rather have expected _inverne_ (non-spring)=
 for
Winter. Verne is cognate to the beautiful Latin word _ver_ (as in Primula=
 
Veris), but _ver_ was in old time the hot season and the _invernis_ was t=
he
cold, as I have understood. Interlingua has _hiberno_ because there is
_hibernar_.... =
 
 
I could be lead to think that if _verne_ is _spring_, what does then _hi-=
_ do?
Should it not be _*inverne_ and thus _estive_ e _*=EDnestive_ for _autumn=
_ and
then of course the _*=EDnestive_ as it is a negation? =
 
 =
 
On the other hand, the international words that are common are _hibernate=
,
hibernal, Hibernia, so if it should be anything that would be _hiBerne_ a=
nd
not _hiVerne_. (If I could decide, that is).