Re: A BrSc a?

Ray:
> >What, to you, is IAL-friendliness? Something that is as easy as possible
> >for as many as possible? Or would having a 'unique selling point' count
> >too?
>
> Both   :)
>
> >(On the grounds that an IAL needs something to make people want
> >to learn it -- even if in actuality you don't intend for people to learn
> >it.) If so, then brevity would be a major selling point -- perhaps the
> >most significant possible selling point (perhaps along with nonambiguity),
>
> This is exactly what Reginald Dutton thought way back in the 1940s; but
> Speedwords has so far proved less successful than Esperanto as an IAL.
But if you look at which conlangs since Esperanto have acquired a
significant following, Loglan/Lojban stand out. Now clearly they
have specialized rather than mass appeal, for obvious reasons, but
their comparative success is precisely that they offered something
new -- some kind of objective competitive advantage, as it were.

We all know than in reality no IAL is going to attract a mass following,
and that people who actually do want to learn and use an IAL will
choose Esperanto. So all that is up for grabs is attracting a
significant 'cult' following, a la Lojban. It strikes me that brevity
and nonambiguity, while maintaining a 'human face', would be far and
away the best selling point.

> >so long as brevity is not bought at the price of excessive complexity.
>
> Indeed - I agree.  Dutton's system was certainly not without its
> complexities; and that consideration is worrying me a little about present
> ideas.
To my mind, the idea of increasing brevity by means of using an unwritten
vowel does not add significant complexity, and the idea of using
homonymy adds a kind of complexity when it comes to learning vocab, but
the rewards in brevity are so great that it would be easy to sell.

--And.

Replies