Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Worldlang esperantoid

Expand Messages
  • lingwadeplaneta
    ... Not just masculine singular, but masculine singular nominative. Let s look at masculine singular in cases: bolshogo bolshomu bolshoi bolshim bolshom ... -i
    Message 1 of 53 , Jan 1, 2011
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In worldlanglist@yahoogroups.com, "<deinx nxtxr>" <deinx.nxtxr@...> wrote:
      >
      > On 12/29/10 2:29 AM, lingwadeplaneta wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > > --- In worldlanglist@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Rice<ansrith@>
      > > wrote:
      > >>
      > >> On 12/28/10, rico_harrison<rico_harrison@> wrote:
      > >>>
      > >>> --- In worldlanglist@yahoogroups.com, risto@ wrote:
      > >>>
      > >>>> Part of speech endings -i : modifiers (adjectives) -e : things
      > >>>> (nouns) -o : circumstances (adverbs) -a : action (active verb)
      > >>>> -u : event (passive verb)
      > >>>
      > >>> Are these assignments inspired by any natural languages, or are
      > >>> they somewhat arbitrary?
      > >>
      > >> Except for the a/u distinction, they're fairly obvious at least
      > >> from an IE standpoint, and pretty much what I've considered for
      > >> several projects.
      > >>
      > >> -i Russian (general Slavic, as I recall)
      > >
      > > for masculine yes (bolshoi), but feminine has -a (bolshaya), neuter
      > > and plural -e (bolshoye, bolshiye)
      >
      > Yes, but the masculine singular is the "dictionary form"

      Not just masculine singular, but masculine singular nominative. Let's look at masculine singular in cases:
      bolshogo
      bolshomu
      bolshoi
      bolshim
      bolshom


      >and as pointed
      > out there are other precedents like the English "-y" and cognate "-ig"
      > in other Germanic languages.
      >

      -i is OK for adjectives. It's because I've seen more than once (last time on the French Atelier forum) an opinion that Russian somehow strongly suggests -i for adjectives that I wanted to clarify that yes, it may suggest it but it may suggest other variants as well.

      I myself don't support one and the same ending for all adjectives (even Jespersen allowed to drop -i from his adjectives), but I haven't been building an esperantoid language.
    • Risto Kupsala
      ... Actually toneless Chinese word can have more than four meanings because there are homophones with identical tones too. ... That s true. There are
      Message 53 of 53 , Feb 11, 2011
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        11.2.2011 17:16, <deinx nxtxr> kirjoitti:
        > On 2/10/11 12:56 PM, cafaristeir wrote:
        >
        >>> Monosyllabic words are not a problem. You can mix mono- and
        >>> polysyllabic words, just like for example English mixes Germanic
        >>> monosyllables and Latinate polysyllables. The tones are a problem,
        >>> but I suppose that they would rather have toneless Chinese words
        >>> than no Chinese words at all!
        >>>
        >> As you know, a toneless Chinese word can have up to 4 different
        >> meanings. Better is to take polysyllabic Chinese words, less prone to
        >> such confusions.

        Actually toneless Chinese word can have more than four meanings because
        there are homophones with identical tones too.

        > There's a big difference between *recognition* and mnemonics. In a
        > worldlang recognition is not practical nor realistic. The possibility
        > of encountering false friends will ruin any attempt to make it
        > reconizable.

        That's true. There are homophones and near homophones across languages.
        Normally in learning a foreign language you know whether familiar
        sounding words are related to your language or not. (In the latter case
        you can just ignore all accidental homophones.) But with worldlangs you
        just can't be sure, at least not nearly as often as in case of
        eurolangs, for example.

        > It's also unfair to say you are taking *words* from
        > another language. We are not. These new languages have their own words
        > with their own semantics. All we are doing is assigning labels to those
        > semantics, and using something familiar as a memory aid. To most people
        > starting to use a worldlang, the vocabulary will be unfamiliar but there
        > will be an occasional resemblance to aid in memorization.

        I agree with that.

        -- Risto
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.