[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
>> I don't like the idea having an opposite-forming word (that's one of >> my least favorite features of Esperanto). I think opposites should >> either be two different words or two different modifications of one >> root. So I like your second idea, but not your first. > > Of course we will have an opposite making word. I mean, there are heaps of > words in English that have only oppisites made with un or some other prefix. > And we'll have pairs like big/small. The question is the proportions. > A little planning ahead of time can produce a lot of reverse-opposites. > bel beautiful ble ugly. I was ambiguous to the point of falsehood: I meant that I don't like Esperanto's (as I understand it) use of *only* the opposite making word for even the most basic concepts (e.g. big and small). Such a word is still useful, though, if only for greater choice. I quite like the bel/ble idea, again as a convention, not a rule. This could be used for common words, and other vocab can just have opposites that are unrelated and formed with the 'un-' equiv. -- Alexander Browne | alexbrowne@hidden.email Saint Paul, Minn., U.S.