3. A Brief English-Interglossa Dictionary [Foreword, A - E]

[18 February 2014: This is a short dictionary arranged by Dorothy Baker, with a foreword by the author of Interglossa, Lancelot Hogben. I got a scanned copy of this work from the University of Birmingham. I put it on this website hoping that it will be useful to the lovers of constructed languages.

Here is a list of errors that I found in the dictionary (now corrected):

• amorpho (amorphi), areneida (araneida), banci (banca), citri (citra), comissari (commisari), cudo-pe (duco-pe), dessicco, dessico (desicco), elavoro (flavoro), execretio (excretio), gephilo (ge philo), hirurundinidae (hirundinidae), holi (heli), lamini (lamina), minito (ministro), mitri (mitra), noge (no ge), ovi (ova), preposso (pre posso), ptera (pteri), rascio (fascio), relecto (reflecto), sacramental (sacramenta), telephon (telefon), temo (tem), tend (tendo), zinci (zinca).

A note for those who will not read the foreword: when the dictionary translates for example "love" as "philo with esthe", it is a short way of telling that it is "philo" as the noun, and "esthe philo" (literally "feel love") as the verb.

Xavi Abadia.]

• FOREWORD WITH INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE

• SUGGESTIONS FOR ENLARGING THE ESSENTIAL WORD-LIST

• ENGLISH - INTERGLOSSA DICTIONARY (A - E)

• ENGLISH - INTERGLOSSA DICTIONARY (F - Z)

FOREWORD with INSTRUCTIONS for USE - by Lancelot Hogben.

In this glossary of Interglossa equivalents for 8000 common Anglo-American vocables choice of words listed closely follows that of the smaller Basic Dictionary. At the outset, it is pertinent to emphasise that international discourse is primarily concerned with matters of international significance. Hence it is hardly fitting to list the various equivalents of common words, such as lady or gentleman, with different, and even widely different, meanings at different social levels in a single national community.

CROSS REFERENCE. A high proportion of English words have more than one meaning in general use, and to print the Interglossa equivalent for each would involve much repetition and waste of space. Mrs. Baker therefore makes extensive use of cross references to preceding items. For instance: try may mean attempt, irritate, judge, test, all of which come before it in alphabetical order. The couplets try on and try out may mean see if suitable (detecte congruo). We therefore find the entry: try see attempt, irritate, judge, test; (try Y on, try Y out) detecte congruo Y. The reader must use his or her good sense when selecting the appropriate equivalent by reference to the entry against it. To use Interglossa correctly it is necessary to think about what one is saying or writing. That cross references force the person who consults the dictionary to think about what he or she is doing is therefore sufficient justification for a little additional physical effort admittedly entailed in turning over a few pages.

WORD FORM AND MEANING. The adverbial form of the Interglossa equivalent of an adjective is the same as that of the adjective itself. Accordingly, the dictionary lists adjective and adverb together as in the following example: mean(ly). This may displace the adverb from its alphabetical position if treated as a word in its own right. So the reader has to remember to look for meanly under its adjectival disguise before, not after, mean(ing). Sometimes the part of speech to which grammar books consign a word sufficiently indicates a distinction of content. For example, the contractions (n.) ursa; (v.) acte tolero in parenthesis show that the first, being equivalent to the noun bear, is the animal and the second, being a verb, may mean put up with, tolerate, etc. The specification (n.) of the last example suffices to label the animal as such, but bear has more than one meaning as a verb. It may mean to carry, give birth, or tolerate, as above. Such meanings appear explicitly in italics, e.g. carry, or by cross reference as explained above. It is advantageous to avoid lengthy definition. Accordingly, an appropriate semantic label of this sort need not be a precise synonym. An epithet or related object may serve the purpose, if sufficiently suggestive of the context. For instance, the entry mine runs: (pron.) mi re or mi pe; (explosive) stato bomba; (quarry) mina.

GRAMMATICAL CONTRACTIONS: The grammatical contractions are: (ad.) adjective and adverb, (adj.) adjective, (adv.) adverb, (conj.) conjunction, (n.) noun, (prep.) preposition or preposition-adverb, (pron.) pronoun, (s.) substantive, i.e. both adjective and noun, ( v.) verb, (v.tr.) transitive verb, (v.i.) intransitive verb, (v.refl.) reflexive verb, (aux.) preposited verb auxiliary equivalent. Where it is possible to have two objects of a verb construction, Y stands for the English direct, Z for the English indirect or instrumental, e.g. lend Y to Z (i.e. give Z the loan of Y) = date credito Z de Y. The contraction Y w.r.t. Z stands for Y with reference to Z or Y with respect to Z. For many English verb-nouns, more particularly those denoting action or sentiment, it suffices to give the abstract noun equivalent with the appropriate operator as follows: hate = miso with esthe. This is short for: hate (n.) miso; (v.tr.) esthe miso. The same convention holds for closely related noun and verb forms, e.g. select(ion) electio: (with acte), which is short for selection (choice) electio: (choose) acte electio.

FINDING THE RIGHT WORD. Semantic, as opposed to grammatical specification, is specially necessary in connexion with multiplicity of idiomatic uses such as any English preposition may have; but it is neither necessary to proceed on the plan of the pocket dictionary which cites several equivalent words with no clue to correct usage nor to copy that of large ones which fill up space with paradigms. It is enough to cite an alternative word or phrase which has the particular meaning. Under the heading in we therefore meet the following: (inside) in: (in such and such locality) loco; (at such and such a position) topo; (during or while) tem; (after or later on) post; (in association with) syn; (by means of) per. With the aid of the suggestions given in parenthesis the reader should be able to recognise the appropriate equivalent in such phrases as the following:

SCOPE OF WORD MATERIAL. Interglossa equivalents given below make use of only the 880 listed vocables in the predecessor of this volume together with the 68 internationally current words included in the text and any other truly international words assimilated without change of the common forms labelled as such by the entry international term. The prescribed forms do not include admissible items of a “residual” vocabulary based on adaptation of internationally current root material other that what appears in the essential word-list. For local things, local institutions, local titles, places, etc. Interglossa uses the local name with Romanised orthography. For many items of the semantic schema the essential word-list of Interglossa offers synonyms based on different internationally current roots. The dictionary cites only the one printed first in the introductory volume. The only exception is FICI which here takes precedence over SYCA (fig).

SPACE ECONOMY. Cursory reading may, as does cursory reading of the Basic Dictionary, lead the reader to suppose that Interglossa fills up a lot of space. This impression is misleading. The analytical structure of Interglossa, like that of Basic, irons out the redundancies of common speech or writing by eliminating everything which is already implicit in a given context. Inescapably the dictionary divorces the word from its context and therefore calls for circumlocutions which would fall out in any real situation. An example will make this clear. For purposes of dictionary compilation we might define the verb to build as to make a house or other building (facte u domi etc.). In ordinary discourse we specify a building when we use the verb build. Thus to build a bridge is merely to make a bridge (facte u ponti). When we are speaking or writing about bread, the substitution of an initial b for the m of making carries with it the additional information that we use dry heat in its manufacture. Usually the hearer or reader knows this or wants information of a different sort. So facte will often suffice for bake.

In almost any complete sentence a comprehensive dictionary definition of verbs of one category is clearly redundant. Animals cry out (acte voco) when they bark, bay, bellow, bleat, bray, caw, cluck, croak, crow, howl, mew, neigh, screech, whinny, etc. The appropriate subject is nearly always sufficient to label the characteristic noise as such. When we want to say that a turtle or a duck-billed platypus has a beak, our aim is to convey the information that these animals have horny jaws (kerati gnatha). Nine times out of ten the owner of a beak on the printed page is neither Ornithorhynchus nor a Chelonian. It is a bird. Since most of us know that the jaws of birds have a horny sheath, the reminder is a gratuitous distraction. Gnatha by itself is therefore good enough. The enclosure of the qualifier (kerati) in brackets draws attention to the fact that we leave it out, unless specifically concerned to make it explicit.

Similarly, aero navi is good enough in a given historical context for a light or heavy airship, with or without a propeller; and will therefore do service in most situations for balloon, dirigible or airplane. If our glossary cites (no-masso) aero navi (minus helica) for the first, the reader is to infer that the words in parenthesis are for use only if it is necessary to make the distinction between one sort of airship and another explicit, and then only to avoid recourse to a residual battery of technical terms.

THE LIMITS OF EXACTITUDE. What claims to word-economy the design of Interglossa justify are on all fours with those of Basic English. That is to say, the task assigned to the essential vocables is merely to meet the needs of non-technical discourse. In everyday speech few folk pay attention to finer technical distinctions which dictionary definitions prescribes. So the compiler of a short dictionary for everyday use often has to face the following dilemma. Should one offer a compact construction which conveys as much as most people ordinarily distinguish in daily use, or should one attempt to specify more precisely what meaning a word has in its own domain of specialised discourse?

An example occurs early. It is doubtful whether a very high proportion of educated people within the Anglo-American speech community know the exact difference between adultery and fornication implicit in the use of the former as prescribed for purposes of canon or common law. In any case, very few of us bother much about it, unless well-informed about legal matters. We have therefore to choose between two alternatives. One is to give a more or less explicit rendering to convey the highest common factor of usage in daily talk or writing, though preferably more explicit than the miniature Basic Dictionary specification of adultery as being untrue. If so, we leave the more precise legal connotation to be dealt with as part of the task of drawing up residual batteries of technical words for specific fields of communication between experts. Otherwise, we have to resort to definition at the risk of undue prolixity. The compiler usually follows the second course. Thus adultery is coitus contrary to marriage contract = COITO ANTI (GAMEO) PROMISSO.

Any satisfactory dictionary of everyday usage, and that is the present aim, must steer a middle course between the Scylla of over-definition on the one hand and the Charybdis of laxity on the other. The compiler of this one has to face a peculiar difficulty which does not beset the lexicographer of a natural language. A natural language embodies all the cultural values of a slab of history and a slice of territory. We take these values for granted without the obligation to pry into the future or adjudicate on the past. In making the dictionary of a constructed language for use as a world-auxiliary we have to bear in mind what sort of society is likely to adopt an auxiliary for world-wide use; and how far we can safely project into a world ready for free communication through its use the values of our own day and generation. Will a world of this sort regard all forms of sexual behaviour which Englishmen mean by misconduct as bad actions? Will it draw a nice distinction between what we call punishment and revenge? Such questions face us at every turn.

STANDARDISATION OF WORD-BLOCKS. For each distinct meaning of an English vocable the ensuing glossary usually gives one equivalent construction; but it is far from true to say that only one construction is legitimate, or that the one given would necessarily be what would first occur to a reader familiar with the list of essential words and with the rules for using them. It is impossible to construct a language with a level of word-economy so high as to exclude all possibility of overlap; and it would be scarcely desirable, if possible, because the result would be monotonous. So what is lawful in Interglossa is not always expedient. In giving priority to a particular construction, the compiler's aim has been to give due weight to stylistic advantages of ringing the changes on diverse ways of expressing a constantly recurring type of qualification, the mnemotechnic advantages of adhering to certain fixed patterns and the semantic advantages of conveying emphasis by making qualifying expressions stand out boldly in the sentence matrix. One such device is the postposited construction. Post-position of a somewhat longer expression in preference to pre-position of a shorter one can shift emphasis in Interglossa as in English, e.g. PYRO-RESISTO and RESISTO DE PYRO (fireproof and proof against fire); NON-ESPERO and MINUS ESPERO (unhopeful and without hope); RE NON HABE CHROMO and RE HABE ZERO CHROMO (it is not coloured and it has no colour).

Shift of emphasis is not the only criterion involved in preference for a MINUS (or other postposited) couplet. A NO-compound is always the un-compound of the corresponding amplifier, hence active if the latter is active. A MINUS couplet has the sense without A or lacking A and leaves the context to supply the topic of which it predicates lack. Thus it may be passive, when the NO-compound is active, but not necessarily so. It often corresponds to the -less derivative but only when the -less derivative is strictly equivalent to the corresponding construction without A. If both the NO-compound and the MINUS couplet are active or both passive, the MINUS couplet is more emphatic. We can bring out similar gradations of contrast by ringing the changes on NON-HARMONO and ANTI or HARMONO and PRO. We can play off the cold logic of HARMONO against the intimacy of COMMUNO or the formality of ANTI against the emotive warmth of MALO.

In prescribing such preferred constructions, one end in view has been to exploit possibilities of word-order to the utmost. In this connexion it is important to notice that reversal of the order of two amplifiers in juxtaposition sometimes signifies nothing at all and sometimes conveys a sharp difference of meaning. It is immaterial whether we express symmetry by ISO LATERO (equal-sidedness) or LATERO ISO (lateral equality); but COMPETO SPORTO (competitive sport) is by no means necessarily the same as, or even akin to, SPORTO COMPETO (playful rivalry). Another criterion of choice is sentence landscape. In general the equivalent of an Aryan verb is an operator ending with -E followed by an amplifier ending with -O. The juxtaposition of the two terminals constitutes a signal pointing to the locus of the verb-equivalent in the sentence matrix; and it is desirable to preserve the semantic unity of the verbal nexus so defined by adhering to this procedure consistently. Thus it is often preferable to use a nominal construction such as OFFERO DE GAMEO (proposal of marriage) rather than one of the type GAMEO OFFERO (marriage proposal), because the former, though longer, slides without change into a more explicit verbal construction, such as DICTE OFFERO DE GAMEO (propose to). From a mnemotechnic viewpoint it is also advantageous to cherish symmetry of prescribed forms for opposites. If, for example, we adopt MINUS POTO DE A or MINUS POSSO DE A as the construction of un-A-able or in-A-ible, the preferable construction for A-able or A-ible is SYN POSSO DE A.

The task of giving full value to word-order, to innuendoes of emphasis, to promptings of context, to symmetry and to sentence landscape provides occasion for comment on one issue insufficiently discussed in the introductory volume. This is the role of the empty associative particle DE. The need for sharp definition of words which define relationships was always to the fore in the original design; but the recognition of this need does not compel us to overlook two facts about the natural history of human communication; each contributory to universal semantic erosion of prepositions or case postpositions in the growth of natural languages. One is that context often suffices to make relations explicit without recourse to specifically definitive vocables. The other is that discrimination between some types of relationship appears to put too great a strain on alertness or subtlety for purposes of everyday life. Hence over-sharpness of definition may defeat its own end. This is peculiarly true of the complex congeries of relationships vaguely labelled possessive or genitive. One eminent philologist has defined the Latin genitive as the case which expresses any relationship whatever. In other words, it expresses nothing at all. If we ask what relationship is common to the two substantives in father's dog, father's debts, father's death and father's duty, or in the corresponding analytical constructions involving recourse to the genitive particle of, we can hardly concede a more generous valuation of the semantic credentials of the Teutonic possessive flexion or preposition.

In highly flexional languages which have a genitive case-terminal, its true function, if it may be said to have one, is merely to act as an invocation of the context to supply what it has no power of its own to convey. Languages as far apart as English and Chinese have two other devices of the same sort. One is juxtaposition, the other being use of an empty particle of generalised association (c.f. love story = story of love). DE is an empty particle on all fours with of. It tallies with all the various so-called possessive uses of the latter and covers the associative domain of to when it is replaceable by in relation to or with respect to. As such it appears in certain standard constructions, e.g. NULLO DE (cancellation of) and RESISTO DE (resistance to); but it may do service for in order to, with a view to if the context labels the implicit relation as such, e.g. OCCASIO DE (opportunity for).

It is legitimate to use any substantive of Interglossa an en epithet, like its Chinese or its Anglo-American equivalent (cf. mouth wash, tooth paste, face powder). If the dictionary gives TECTI DE ORA (roof of mouth) for palate, ORA TECTI is equally legitimate. Preference for a construction involving the empty particle of relationship takes into account the desirability of avoiding long qualifying expressions, which make for congestion of the verbal traffic. From that point of view, it is better to say U GE SCHIZO TECTI DE ORA than U GE SCHIZO ORA TECTI (a cleft palate). On the other hand, the construction involving juxtaposition contravenes the rule of propinquity when the qualifier is postposited. For a congenital cleft palate, UN ORA TECTI GE SCHIZO PRE NATO is preferable to U TECTI DE ORA GE SCHIZO PRE NATO. The assumption inherent in the choice of the DE construction, if given, is that preposited qualifications occur more commonly. Clearly the choice of juxtaposition or use of a construction involving the empty particle as more or less emphatic ways of expressing a notion involving a relationship implicit in the context, in preference to a construction making the relationship itself explicit, involves an act of judgment about situations in which a block of words is likely to occur. Thus the task Dorothy Baker has undertaken in continuous consultation with me has been more than the mechanical labour of rearranging the contents of Part II of the introductory volume.

When everything that can be done to safeguard the individual meaning of words is accomplished, the task of making a language is still unfinished. Is should be possible to design a language of which each vocable has a clear-cut domain; and there is no good reason to doubt the possibility of establishing an international authority which could thereafter exercise restraint on degradation of meaning. (For good or bad, the Academy has succeeded in exercising some considerable measure of restraint on the growth of French.) Still the fact remains, that proper use of words involves more than knowledge of rules about moving the pieces in a complicated game of chess. We can design a constructed language free from the more arbitrary idioms of daily speech, but we cannot escape the peculiar force which certain recurring blocks of word-material will acquire. Certain gambits, opening moves and end-games will find favour. Learning the language, like learning to play chess, will involve learning what they are.

The introductory volume did not appear until the author had satisfied himself, that the verbal material of Interglossa and its devices of word-order are adequate to cover the range of everyday usage in the smaller Basic Dictionary. To that end it was necessary to make a first draft of what now appears. The work of selecting certain preferred constructions was subsequent. The results appear here. The introductory volume provided the tools and raw materials. The dictionary gives Interglossa a gestalt. One consequence of this process of standardising blocks of word-material needs a word of comment to forestall misunderstanding.

The introductory volume stressed the fact that no words of Interglossa - except the pseudonyms MI, TU, NA, MU, which are pure pronouns - fall uniquely into the categories of a flexional language. A verboid is equivalent to a finite verb, infinitive, gerund, verb-noun, or adjectival participle. An amplifier signifying action may be equivalent to an abstract adjective or adverb and may “govern an object” like a preposition or gerund. Amplifiers which signify relationship do the work of prepositions, conjunctions, adjectives and adverbs. Amplifiers which signify states do the work of adjectives, nouns and adverbs. In general therefore one and the same word may provide an adequate substitute for several Aryan vocables assigned to different parts of speech; but an analogous statement is not true of word-patterns. As a postposited attributive construction MINUS CHROMO (without colour, lacking colour) is an emphatic equivalent of the adjectival NO-CHROMO (uncoloured); but U MINUS CHROMO DE (the lacking colour of) is not the emphatic equivalent of U NO-CHROMO or U MINUS CHROMO when one or other fills the role of subject.

For this reason alone, emphasis is not the only desideratum at stake when we have to choose between a NO- compound and a MINUS or ZERO couplet. We can exploit the distinction to cater for the language habits of speech communities which draw a sharp distinction between certain verbal categories by offering different formal equivalents in accordance with such considerations. The following table shows the situations in which various types of negation are equivalent; and dispenses with the necessity of giving a separate predicative and attributive equivalent for adjectival forms listed in what follows:

(c) Substantives (24)

In addition to the preceding, the following synonyms are useful:

The following internationally current words are worth adding to the 75 listed in the primer:

ALIBI

CENSOR

COGNAC

DYNAMO

ELEVATOR

ESCALATOR

HANGAR

KINEMA

OMELETTE

OPERA

ORCHESTRA

PASSEPORT

SUBPOENA

VISA

ZEPPELIN

It might also be advantageous to split the following:

Residual Vocabulary

1. Animals

The following are based on international zoological terms for class, family, genus, or, in exceptional cases, on the specific name which is the second element of the bi-nomial epithet, in accordance with the range of the common word.

2. Useful plants including fruit and vegetables.

We here follow the same principle as for animals. For flowers, see Interglossa.

3. Geographical names

The adjectival form is always the same as the noun. e.g. Scotland = Scotland or Scottish or Scots or Scotch. For colonies, in accordance with international postal usage and hence for British dependencies, the form is that of the colonial power. Continents keep the Latin form.

Afghanistan

Albania

Argentine

Australia

Austria = Osterreich

Belgium = Belgique

Bolivia

Brazil

Bulgaria

Cameroons = Cameroun

Canada

Chile

China

Colombia

Costa Rica

Cuba

Cyprus

Czechoslovakia = Ceskosslovensko

Denmark = Danmark

Ecuador

England

Egypt = Egypte

Finland = Suomi

Formosa

France

Germany = Deutschland

Gold Coast

Greece = Hellas

Guina

Haiti

Hawaii

Holland = Nederland

Ireland (northern) = Northern Ireland

Ireland (southern) = Eire

Iceland = Island

Iran

Iraq

Italy = Italia

Japan = Nippon

Java

Jugoslavia = Jugoslavija

Kenya

Libya

Malay

Mexico

Morrocco = Maroc

New Guinea

New Zealand

Nicaragua

Nigeria

Norway = Norge

Panama

Paraguay

Peru

Philippines = Filipino

Poland = Polska

Portugal

Rhodesia

Rumania = Romania

Russia = U.S.S.R.

Scotland

South Africa = Sud Afrika

Spain = Espana

Sumatra

Sweden = Sverige

Switzerland = Helvetia

Syria = Syrie

Tanganyka

Thailand

Tibet

Turkey = Turkiye

United States

Uruguay

Venezuela

Wales

4. Military Terms

References to alternatives based on the supplementary word list occur in the text in parenthesis.

SYNONYMS. The writer did not express any strong preference for the first choice listed in pigeon-holes of the semantic schema with synonyms. It is therefore desirable to correct the impression that the first choice is necessarily the best. Below is a list of all synonyms with an asterisk marking those which, though not cited first, are on the whole preferable. Synonyms not included in the first draft appear in parenthesis: