[YG Conlang Archives] > [texperanto group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
--- In texperanto@yahoogroups.com, "HandyDad" <lsulky@r...> wrote: > --- In texperanto@yahoogroups.com, "Rex May" <rmay@m...> wrote: > > Upon reflection, I've decided that "e" for "and" is a bad idea. I > > think I'll go back to "kay". For "or", I can't use "aw," because > > that is now the imperative ending. I actually think that "kor" would > > be the way to go here. > > Good and good. Glad you agree. Actually, in picking 'e' I violated the whole notion of homonym-avoidance elaborated below. > > > > > Other short words should not interfere with roots. That is, I > > decided that too many borrowable roots begin with "al," so I started > > using "Ad" for to, towards. Now I'm thinking that too many roots > > begin with "ad" for that to be optimum. > > Rex, could you illustrate what kind of problem you're trying to avoid? > With "sukero" the problem is that the root for 'a drop/bit/unit of > something', "er-", occurs also as a syllable at the end of the root > for 'sugar', "suker-". I get that. But I'm not understanding how you > mean 'interfere' in 'Other short words should not interfere with roots'. > > Could you give an example of how "zu", say, would be superior to "al" > or "ad" in this respect? Yes, I was vague. What I'm thinking about is roots we might have like admirar, admiralo, adiktar, adorar, aluminumo, almondo, alumeto, that would be marginally misleading because the ad and al look like they're constituents of a compound. OTOH, law me, 'zu' would be much less likely to begin a general average European root, and hence, less potential confusion. Same of course applies to el or ex, with so many roots beginning with them. Now, I like iz, but it does seem less Eo-ish than del would, and del has the advantage of combining easily as a prefix with most roots. 'Delirar,' 'delijar', 'deltirar' etc. Now, Eo uses 'de' for the meaning of 'from,' which, I think, is putting too much on such a little word. I'd thought about just using English 'from,' or the abbreviate 'fro,' but now I'm thinking that maybe German 'aus,' or Teo 'aws' would be the best word to replace 'el.' Lu delijis la skatolo. Lu izijis la skatolo. Lu awsijis la skatolo. Okay -- iz, del, or aws? And for just 'from', do we want to use de, from, or fro? And, which is better - zu or tsu, or, for that matter, tu or to? And we also have 'ko' from Russian. All this is nitpicking, perhaps, but I do want Teo to be marginally better than Eo, and avoidance of homonyms is a worthy goal. Oh, that's the reason for 'dan' replacing 'en' - lots of roots, I think, begin with 'en.' And 'in' would be even worse, and besides that, it's also the feminine suffix. > > I await reactions. It's lonely in here. > > I'm here for you, Rex. :-) > Dank zu (tsu, to, tu, ko) ta!