applicable to any words of Interglossa. It is a completely isolating language. So no words have flexions characteristic of such classes in Aryan languages. If we apply the epithet verb or adjective to a word in Interglossa, we mean an invariant word (i.e. particle) which corresponds in a particular context to a particular verb or adjective in French, German or Russian. With few exceptions the same vocable also corresponds to several grammatical homosemes of any Aryan language.
(c) Parts of Speech
In all this there is nothing new to the Chinese nor to the Malay speech-community. There is scarcely anything new to anyone who speaks the Anglo-American language. A classification of parts of speech relevant to an isolating language will not follow the categories appropriate to the flexional system of the Aryan group. It will reflect the function of individual vocables in the sentence-landscape. From that point of view we can classify the vocables of Interglossa as follows:
(a) Pseudonyms (11). Four of these (mi, tu, na, mu) are pure pronoun-equivalents divested of any flexions. The remaining seven are of wider range vis-à-vis the practice of Aryan languages. They function both as pronouns and as equivalents for nouns or for corresponding adjectives. This will offer no difficulty to Scandinavians (see p. 82), nor to English-speaking people who customarily refer to a he-goat, and do not hesitate to answer the question: is it a he or a she?
(b) Interrogative, Imperative, Negative and Comparative Particles (6), two of which allow for question, request or command without deviation from the invariant word-pattern. Such particles are common to many languages, and we can find many corresponding periphrases in the Aryan group (e.g. French n'est-ce pas? and Swedish eller hur?)
(c) Substantives¹ (396). These are names for concrete things or classes of concrete things. As is increasingly true of Anglo-American (queen mother, water power, trade cycle), any one of them can replace an adjectival word-form.
(d) Verboids (20). These are names of processes and states. Like many so-called English verbs, any one verboid may replace a finite verb form, the corresponding abstract noun, and the appropriate epithet, i.e. adjective (cf. we love, the love of God, a love story.) This class is small. Needless to say, all verboids are invariant, but this need not surprise an Anglo-