From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Fri Oct 04 05:20:27 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_2_0); 4 Oct 2002 12:20:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 33029 invoked from network); 4 Oct 2002 12:20:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 4 Oct 2002 12:20:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Oct 2002 12:20:16 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17xRUa-0000Vq-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 04 Oct 2002 05:23:40 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17xRTy-0000VP-00; Fri, 04 Oct 2002 05:23:02 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 04 Oct 2002 05:23:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailbox-12.st1.spray.net ([212.78.202.112]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17xRTu-0000V6-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 04 Oct 2002 05:22:58 -0700 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-67-81.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.67.81]) by mailbox-12.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7A2E5DA63 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 14:12:46 +0200 (DST) To: Subject: [lojban] Re: Lojban in 12 weeks? Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 13:14:25 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <3D9CCC87.6040000@bilkent.edu.tr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal X-archive-position: 1895 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "And Rosta" Reply-To: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Robin.tr: > As for the brochure, I'd suggest dropping the "Lojban is easy to learn" > bit. It _is_ easier to learn than any natlang which isn't close enough > to your native language as to qualify as a dialect (e.g. Italian for > Spanish speakers), but _no_ language is easy to learn, and a lot of > conlangs are easier than Lojban, especially if their based on the > general class of languages your native language falls into (e.g. > Esperanto for Europeans). I think it's actually worth making this point, rather than dropping all mention of how easy Lojban is to learn. It's also worth making the point that for no other language in existence are the fundamentals as thoroughly described in publicly accessible form as Lojban. --And.