of China, and does not confront the Japanese or the Bantu with the arbitrary difficulties inherent in any agglutinative language based on Aryan models. In short, any language designed like V or E imposes the grammatical idiosyncrasies of a particular language family on everybody who uses it. Unlike its predecessors, designed exclusively, and admittedly,¹ to meet the taste of Western Europe and the English-speaking peoples, Interglossa is for a world in which China, Japan, and eventually the peoples of Africa, will march in step with the U.S.S.R. and with western civilization.²
(ii) Interglossa has a very rigid and straightforward word-order, with features designed to limit recourse to congested expressions. The pattern is the same for statements, questions, requests, commands, and for all classes of subordinate (including relative) clauses. The verbal stock-in-trade of Interglossa includes a small battery of empty words to act as signposts of sentence-landscape. For the same reason, certain classes of words have a characteristic final syllable, but these classes do not correspond to arbitrary non-semantic categories (parts of speech) defined by flexions. Interglossa has no flexions.
(iii) Interglossa has a vocabulary based on internationally current roots. It therefore has a Greek content enormous in comparison with that of earlier projects. Its very name symbolizes the fact that it is a Latin-Greek hybrid, as Novial is a Latin-Teutonic hybrid. Since we have many Latin-Greek alternatives in current international technical terms, it is possible to combine the claims of word-economy vis-à-vis self-expression (see pp. 22-23) with the advantages of a residual battery of synonyms for stylistic purposes.