Ro is an a priori ‘philosophical language,’ meaning you can guess what category of meaning a word falls into merely by looking at the first letters. For example, bofoc means red, bofod means orange, and bofof means yellow. It was created by the Reverend Edward Powell Foster.
Foster was 50 or 51 years old in 1904 when he was seized by the uncontrollable urge to create an a priori langauge. He wrote, "Unexpectedly came the thought: ‘How strange it is that there is nothing in the appearance of a written or printed word that gives the slightest hint of its meaning. Why should a word not be a picture? A new word, never seen before would then, like a painting seen for the first time, convey at least some of the meaning to the eye.’"
Foster reported being completely absorbed by the idea. "The thought had startling force. It was like the sudden lifting of a curtain to reveal a world that I had never dreamed was in existence. It filled me with amazement that people could rest content with words purely arbitrary and in themselves utterly meaningless, when they might be constructed scientifically and thus made self-interpreting. It seemed plain that a language of that description would easily more than double the capacity of mankind for the acquisition of knowledge. The vivid impression took instant and complete possession of me, and brought the quick resolution to tell to others what I had seen.
"After two years' study of the problem faint outlines of system emerged from chaos and in 1906 the first Ro publication, an 8-page leaflet with a few prospective Ro words, was printed.
"Soon my wife joined in the work with enthusiasm. She has a remarkable linguistic gift amounting almost to absolute genius in her ability to discriminate between closely allied synonyms and to select the word that exactly fits the place to be filled. She has now prepared an English-Ro dictionary of about 16,000 Ro words, and can turn any word that can be defined from any language into a self-interpreting Ro word. We expect to print her dictionary as soon as we can get the means to do so.
"...Ro adopts the alphabet that it finds ready-made, and approved by centuries of use, with the existing form of letters and order of sequence. They already symbolize elementary SOUNDS. Ro makes of them its ideograms. That is, Ro uses them as symbols of elementary IDEAS. Grammarians have already classified words into what they call 'Parts of Speech.' This is but another expression for ELEMENTS OF LANGUAGE. It is doubtful if any human being ever possessed a brain that was superior in intellectual power to that of Aristotle. He gives as the ten categories of human thought: Substance, Quantity, Quality, Relation, Place, Time, Position, Possession, Action, Passivity. Ro classifies words under categories like these, using consonants as symbols, for example, letting B stand for Substance or Existence, C for Quantity, D for Place, G for Quality, J for Relation, etc. One of the five vowels added to these initial consonants divides its general signification into five classes, headed by a two-letter syllable, consonant and vowel, and one of the 20 consonants (21 in fact) of the alphabet added to this, gives more than 2000 three-letter syllables, Consonant, Vowel, Consonant, which are the stemwords of Ro as a language.
"If these classifications are correctly made, we shall have all the words of human language grouped according to their signification, exactly parallel with their alphabetic arrangement, and you can find the Ro word that you may wish to use, as readily as you can find a person in a city when you know the street on which he lives and the number of his house."
The categories of Ro's vocabulary are presented here:
| categories | examples | |
| a | (pronouns) | ab - I ac - you |
| ba | thing (substances) | babnac - oxygen bacra - clay |
| be | forms of matter | bed - liquid bejab - powder |
| bi | sky, weather | bidab - wind bigal - rain |
| bo | "sense-affecting matter" | bocev - shine bojob - loud |
| bu | geographical words | Budval - United States bufab - island |
| ca | quantity | cafab - amount calif - very |
| ce | part | cebac - piece cefac - molecule |
| ci | comparative quantity | cibuc - equality cik - more |
| co | conjunctive quantity | codef - attach cokec - unite |
| cu | whole | cudi - totally cugif - thoroughly |
| da | place | dabag - position dagem - inhabit |
| de | space | debab - line defak - peak |
| di | clothing | dirab - skirt dikac - jacket |
| do | furnishings | dodab - bed dofab - table |
| du | building | dubal - house dulab - barn |
| e | (verbs) | eba - to be el - is, am |
| fa | form | fabel - seem fagam - portrait |
| fe | aesthetics | febek - decorate fepkac - baseball |
| fi | desireable things | fibac - reward ficef - prefer |
| fo | "words of logic" | focap - disputation foneb - deceive |
| fu | "words of geometry" | fudad - triangle fugaf - square |
| ga | quality | gabav - proclivity gaceb - classify |
| ge | measurement | gebab - millimeter gejab - height |
| gi | (length, expansion) | gibo - long gidod - big |
| go | "opposite gi" | gobo - short godod - little |
| gu | "opposite ci" | guboc - unequal guk - less |
| ha | having | hab - to have hak - keep |
| he | getting | hec - acquire hek - take |
| hi | want possession of | hiv - to covet hiz - crave |
| ho | transfer property | hob - give hok - deliver |
| hu | lose possession of | hul - abandon hum - discard |
| i | (prepositions) | in - in iz - among |
| ja | relation | jabal - proportion jabefu - reference |
| je | beginning | jeb - begin jemsak - kitten |
| ji | middle | jibof - ordinary jifob - central |
| jo | end | jobed - conclude joteb - terminate |
| ju | of orderliness | jubuf - uniformity jubim - consistently |
| ka | "verbs of force" | kaf - throw kak - kick |
| ke | locomotion | kecev - walk kedek - swim |
| ki | "k plus i- prepositions" | kined - inhabit kizeb - mingle |
| ko | "opposite ki" | koned - vacate kozeb - separate |
| ku | change | kubed - alter kugeb - improve |
| la | positive | labic - actually lafof - beautiful |
| le | vegetable anatomy | lebak - vine lecab - root |
| li | life | libo - alive ligeb - to eat |
| lo | "opposite li" | lobod - dead logeb - to fast |
| lu | plant names | lugacad - eggplant lugacat - tomato |
| ma | "opposite to la" | maboc - potential mafof - ugly |
| me | animal anatomy | mebac - body mebar - arm |
| mi | voice, cry | mibex - quack mijes - hiss |
| mo | expressive act | mofem - moan mokef - complain |
| mu | animal kingdom | mugsaf - moth musgaf - sow (pig) |
| n | (negative, opposite) | nau - nothingness nel - does not |
| o | "opposite to i" | on - out oz - except |
| pa | instrument, tool | padak - wheel paltaf - scissors |
| pe | receptacles | pefal - bottle pejal - casket |
| pi | vehicles | pibwad - wheelbarrow pidrac - bicycle |
| po | food | pojag - gravy pojal - salad |
| pu | waste matter | pucag - garbage pulak - immorality |
| ra | person | radac - boy rafac - girl |
| re | "get ideas" | rebec - think rebev - consider |
| ri | retain ideas | ribec - remember rebile - remind |
| ro | tell, say | rofad - vowel romad - lecture |
| ru | writing, print | rucag - document rugaf - paragraph |
| sa | "feelings in general" | sabap - mood sapog - angry |
| se | personal feelings | sedab - contentment sepol - wary |
| si | mutual feelings | sibra - friend sik - love |
| so | moral, ethical, legal | soled - deserve solnoc - immoral |
| su | superhuman | sujmap - vampire Suva - God |
| ta | time | tal - month tam - season |
| te | duration | tedic - soon telob - sudden |
| ti | point of time | tik - previous til - present tim - next |
| to | slow time, rest, stop | tokeb - cease tokaf - pause |
| tu | brief time | tubot - temporary tucof - recent |
| u | (conjunctions) | ud - and ur - or |
| va | volition, the will | vadis - willingly vakok - diligent |
| ve | prospective volition | veber - plan veslam - premonition |
| vi | "the will at work" | videl - control vilec - cooperate |
| vo | collective will | vobza - democracy vogab - loyalty |
| vu | mutual will | vudife - offer vumar - a contract |
| w | (interrogation) | wabek - ask wuk? - can? |
| y | (affirmation) | yum - must yus - should |
| za | number | zac - two zakic - doubly |
| ze | collective number | zedac - crowd zemak - flock |
| zi | re-, again | zibec - repeat ziket - return |
| zo | printed list | zobac - catalog zobad - schedule |
| zu | continuance | zumo - immortal zukel - remain |
Ro's creator did a good job of publicizing his language, at least in United States newspapers, magazines and almanacs. Foster requested and received endorsements and financial contributions from many businessmen, scholars, and politicians. In fact, this appears to be how he made his living– traveling back and forth between his Ohio and West Virginia hometowns, soliciting subscriptions to his journal Roia and selling his dictionaries. In the 1921 booklet Roap Foster mentioned that the majority of his subscribers were in Ohio and West Virginia.
A few readers of the periodical Roia composed brief texts in Ro. The language never gained a large following, and as far as I have been able to determine, it was only supported and used by English-speakers, so its usefulness as an interlanguage was never really tested.
Roia ceased publishing in 1931. The last Ro book of the 20th century was the English-Ro dictionary printed in the spring of 1932. The dictionary includes a note from the Fosters saying that they are about to celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary and they will continue working on Ro as long as they live. The little book concludes with a Ro translation of the poem Thanatopsis.
Edward Foster died in 1937. He and his wife are buried
in Riverview Cemetery in West Virginia
Apart from almost eliminating the definite and indefinite articles, Ro grammar and syntax are nearly identical to English. Indeed, Ro texts published prior to about 1925 appear to be word-for-word encodings of English, without much thought given to the underlying meaning of idioms, prepositions, phrasal verbs and other items that require careful consideration when one is doing a real translation (as opposed to a verbatim encoding). Beginning in 1925 Mr. and Mrs. Foster became slightly more aware of these things, partly as a result of correspondence received from overseas readers of Roia who were not as linguistically naive as the Fosters.
Below is the basic grammar of Ro, described in Foster's own words...
Ro adopts as its alphabet the 26 letters a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z, in the order here given, and without accents or diacritical marks. This is the Latin alphabet, with ‘w’ added.
Of these letters, a e i o and u are vowels; the others, consonants.
The vowels are pronounced as in Italian or German, or in the English words far, they, pique, no, truth. They may be either long or short, but each vowel should make a distinct syllable, and they should never be mixed as in diphthongs or triphthongs.
The letters b, d, f, g (hard as in get, go,) h, k, l, m, n, p, r, s (sharp, as in see,) t, v, w, y and z, are pronounced as in English.
C is a simple sound as English sh, French ch, or German sch. Ch as in English ‘church’ is a double sound, and not used in Ro.
Dh is a single sound as in English ‘the’ but is very infrequent in Ro.
J is pronounced as in French, as ‘z’ in ‘azure.’ English ‘J’ is a double sound.
Q is like ‘ng’ in ‘ringing.’ It is a single sound.
X in English is ‘ks’ or ‘gz.’ Ro permits this sound for X, but prefers the Greek X, German CH or Celtic GH.
English ‘long I’ as ‘Y’ in ‘MY’ is ‘AY’ in Ro.
Ro uses ‘th’ as in English ‘thick’ but very seldom.
There is no rule of accent in Ro words other than the natural one of emphasizing the distinctive syllable. Thus: Ag wela RADac ur RAFac? = ‘Is it a boy or a girl?’ ‘Is he a boy or a man?’ = Ad wela radAC ur radAL?
In Ro the designation of case follows the example set by English. The Subject or Nominative case is indicated by its position before the verb, and the Accusative or Objective case by its position after the verb. The Possessive or Genitive case is denoted by an ‘e’ following the noun or pronoun, with or without an apostrophe preceding it as in the ’s of the English possessive. Thus: Abe radap’e radat’e rukab. ‘My father’s brother’s book.’
The Plural number is denoted by the final Z. This is taken from the English plural sign S which is usually pronounced like Z.
I admire Foster's determination and appreciate the many hours of work he put into his project, but any constructed language gives an observer ideas about how things might have been done differently. I do not mean to insult or discourage anybody who is enthusiastic about Ro as it stands, but I want to discuss the particular ways in which I feel Ro has room for improvement.
1. too similar to English
Caldwell Harpur (one of the most fluent writers of Ro apart from the Fosters) and others wrote letters to the editor, published in Roia, expressing the opinion that Ro was too much like a verbatim encoding of English. The Reverend Foster rejected 20th century Roists' calls to make Ro less English-like, but he can't stop 21st century Roists from doing so if they wish.
2. some quirky categorizations
Some of Foster's categorization decisions are questionable. Why is the underground legume lefpat in the same sub-category as tree-nuts like lefpaf? Why is ‘cancer’ in pu- rather than in lo- with the other diseases? Why couldn't the few items in zo- have been put in ru-, thus leaving zo- available for future expansion needs?
In the be- category we find mostly matter-related words such as bebam = steam, befas = soap, befmal = gelatin. But in the midst of this section we also find a string of words that have irregular opposites and obviously belong in some other category: belcok = unimportant, bemcok = important, beldop = lean, bemdop = fat. And we also find a series of mood words: bekmod = morose, bekmol = sullen, bekmos = grouchy. How did these oddball items get into the be- section?
3. difficult to memorize
I'm not convinced that any human could actually memorize the Ro vocabulary. Imagine a gardener trying to learn luladan = goldenrod, lulafaf = zinnia, lulafal = sunflower, lulafap = coreopsis, etc. There are long sequences of monotonously similar words and there aren't many hooks to hang your memory on. Perhaps a system that incorporates more compounding would be more learnable. A sunflower will turn towards the sun, for example, and its disk resembles an icon of the sun, so many natlangs have their word for ‘sun’ embedded in their word for ‘sunflower.’ Ro ignores this lesson at its own peril.
4. error-prone
If you type any significant amount of Ro text with a typewriter or computer, you can't help noticing the difficulty of finding any typographical errors afterwards. In Suma, another a priori language, it is quite obvious if you typed a consonant where a vowel should be, or if you used a letter that is not in Suma's alphabet. In Ro every letter of the alphabet is used, and words can juxtapose consonants and vowels in many different ways. It is very hard to spot a typo in such a language, and even the smallest typo changes the meaning of a word.
In English, if I type ‘langauge’ instead of ‘language’ everyone can figure out what I meant. Some people who read quickly will not even notice that a mistake was made; their mind will automatically correct the error while digesting the sentence. But in Ro, if my finger slips and I type lugayar instead of lugayat while editing a recipe, it is not obvious that a mistake has been made nor is it clear what word was originally intended. Imagine your annoyance at waking up from surgery in Ro-land to discover that the slightly dyslexic surgeon had removed your melkad instead of your meldak.
5. hard to expand
Finally, there is a serious problem with Ro and all a priori languages controlled by one person: What do you do when a category of morphemes is full but you need to add a new concept? Some of the CVCVC and CVCCVC sequences of words were completely filled up by Foster but a modern user can see that additional concepts need to be wedged in somehow. Foster rudely used up all the possible two-letter main categories (ba- be- bi- etc.) and, as far as I can see, he did not leave enough room for expansion within some of the sub-sub-categories.
©2001-2003 by RKH