Newsgroups: alt.uu.lang.misc,sci.lang,alt.language.artificial
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.ums.edu!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!netcom.com!brg
From: brg@netcom.com (Bruce R. Gilson)
Subject: Re: Naturalismo e schematicismo, no problema in linguas auxiliar
Message-ID: <brgE2M9xH.126@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <57p39d$qa1@oden.abc.se> <58flei$mk3@nntp1.best.com> <58pp7f$spv@oden.abc.se> <32B765AE.4A2F@usa.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 16:03:17 GMT
Lines: 20
Sender: brg@netcom17.netcom.com

In article <32B765AE.4A2F@usa.net>, Christopher ZERVIC  <zervic@usa.net> wrote:


>Did Ido use the only word in Esperanto that was totally made up and can =

>not be traced to any national language? Im talking about, of course =

>_edzo_(=3Dhusband) and of course all of its forms such as edzino, edzigxi, =

No. The Ido word for "spouse" is _spozo_. For "husband" and "wife" it has
"spozulo"/"spozino". (Ido does not have the asymmetry of Esperanto, of there
being a "feminine" suffix, but that masculine and epicene forms are not
distinguished.)


                                Bruce R. Gilson
                                email: brg@netcom.com
                                IRC: EZ-as-pi
                                WWW: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3141
                                (for language stuff: add /langpage.html)
