Ido and Interlingua compared
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Both languages are fairly successful. Ido is what is called schematic (easier to learn for speakers of very different languages), whereas Interlingua is what is called naturalistic (easier to understand for speakers of related languages).
[edit] Neutrality of Vocabulary
While both languages have a majority of Latin/Romance words in their lexicons, Ido has has a somewhat larger number of Germanic and Slavic words, so it could be suggested that Ido is more internationally neutral. Germanic and Slavic words in Interlingua are often Romanized. Compare English blockade, German Blockade, and Interlingua blocada. When Interlingua adopts foreign words, however, they frequently retain their original form. By comparison, all words in Ido take on characteristic Ido finals and orthographies.
Both languages make use of an objective procedure to identify international words for their lexicons. Interlingua’s procedure identifies a ‘’prototype’’ that is common to the various forms of a word in its source languages. This, combined with a natural grammar, orthography, and phonetics, improves the recognizability of the vocabulary, especially for speakers of Western languages. For more details, see Interlingua.
[edit] Orthography
Both languages use the Latin alphabet, but Ido orthography is such that based on the spelling of a word, you can pronounce it unambiguously. Interlingua, on the other hand, uses a discernably more complicated and sometimes ambiguous orthography.
|
|
|
---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|