Logical Language Group wrote:
> Alas, most conlangs that are not artlangs or fictional languages seem to me
> to be "codes". I most often recognize a code by the fact that the lexicon
> is presented with single word English definitions. I find it hard to
> characterize a conlang like Glosa as anything other than "English with
> strange (regularized) grammar and odd-looking codewords". In short, only
> one step removed from Pig Latin. I cannot make this statement without it
> sounding disparaging - it IS disparaging.
So to be a real AND respectable language, we need an army ...
One day the Glosa Nation will make you eat your pig-latin!