Thanks for your comments! I'm glad you like the language
wo ala lo means I eat it or I give food to him/her? Humans in context probably understand what you would say, but human out of context (Image to read in a cartel prohibition Angos text for "Do not feed animals here" which could be misinterpreted as "Do not eat animals here") or computer translator can heavy fail sentence interpretation in point that isn't a small detail.
Correct, just saying "X ala Y" could be confusing without context. But there are simple options to make oneself better understood. Ex: "wo dala alo de hefo" (I give food to the animal). What Angos offers is a simpler way to convey this meaning IF the context is already known between the speakers.
Another trait that a bit perplex me is the mandatory use of tense particles ('me' and 'ke') and in other side the lack of aspect particles (at least perfective or imperfective). I suggest to make optional tense particles and create two mandatory particles (or another marker) for imperfective or perfective aspect. It could be a smarter distinction.
If I succeed to build a IAL language I would refuse the mandatory plural mark like Angos 'le' and introduce an useful 1+2 (I+you) pronoun.
I suppose I should clarify that in the grammar guide. "me" "ke" and "le" are not mandatory if context is clear. For example, prepositions/adverbs can indicate time, and a phrase like "do not feed the animals" could be rendered as "nae dala alo de hefo" without "le". Modifiers such as "this" and "any" can further specify if necessary. As far as I+you, there's "le wo", but I personally don't like the idea of dual or paucal or clusivity in an auxiliary language.
Maybe some two-letter particles sounds to much similar, for example 'de' and 'te'.
I suppose, but those are hard to get rid of in any language, to be honest. At least you know that "de" will be before a noun, and "te" will be before a verb".