From nessus@free.fr Fri Sep 13 03:00:58 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: nessus@free.fr X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 13 Sep 2002 10:00:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 53830 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2002 10:00:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 13 Sep 2002 10:00:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mel-rto4.wanadoo.fr) (193.252.19.23) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Sep 2002 10:00:57 -0000 Received: from mel-rta8.wanadoo.fr (193.252.19.79) by mel-rto4.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D760D080053EF16 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 12:00:57 +0200 Received: from ftiq2awxk6 (193.248.5.235) by mel-rta8.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D8011E3000CD0D0 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 12:00:56 +0200 Message-ID: <002201c25b0e$2c5171c0$eb05f8c1@ftiq2awxk6> To: References: <8b.1da07da3.2aafc1e0@aol.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20020910201610.03175ec0@pop.east.cox.net> <0209102250130T.02338@neofelis> Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Le Petit Prince: Can we legally translate it? Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 12:10:47 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Lionel Vidal" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=47678341 X-Yahoo-Profile: cmacinf >We could always translate linguistics, something we are used to doing >%^) Comrie, who has interest in constructed languages, would seem a person >likely to give permission to translate, perhaps especially his Typology >book which was germinal in my early Lojban design effort. Not so far from linguistic and rather recently published is the CCL : at least here is a recent book whose copyright problems could surely be dealt with :-) More seriously, IMHO there is nothing like a well-written grammar book in the very language it describes to motivate and help a devoted student. Besides, many will see it as a kind of indirect proof of that language expressive possibilities. A few decades ago, the PAG did much for promoting Esperanto, or maybe more to the point, to justify the promotion of the language (not that shuch a thing needs any justification) and to encourage students as well as to give them a good reference work. This is very useful for non-constructed languages too: for example something like the breton grammar of Kervella written in breton was decisive in France to make Breton recognize as something other than a 'baraguinage' worth forgetting. Forgive me if all this has already been discussed before: I've been regularly reading this list for only a few weeks. Anyway, don't you think it would be quite a challenge to explain lojban notions like brivla or selbri or the tense system intricacies in lojban :-) mu'omi'e lioNEL