Sally Caves wrote:
The copyright directions
> at the front of the book (published by "Valley-dwellers"-- no place of
> publication given) are so effing anal--
>
> "No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
> system, transmitted in any form or any means, electronic, mechanical,
> photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the
> publisher. This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not,
> by
> way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired out or otherwise
> circulated without the publisher's prior consent, blah blah blah)"
Good grief.
.. Compare the copyright instructions to Le
> Guin's _Always Coming Home_: "No part of this book may be used or
> reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission EXCEPT IN
> THE
> CASE OF BRIEF QUOTATIONS EMBODIED IN CRITICAL ARTICLES AND REVIEWS.
>
> Whew! That gives me some leeway.
That seems to be the standard for most published stuff, even if it's not
explicitly stated in the © notice.
>
> Novelists, not musicians, understand the critical and scholarly world and
> the advantages of having someone critique, and thus publicize, their work.
So it seems.
>
> The same site in the Wikipedia gives a linguist's criticism of Ryan's
> invention:
>
> quoting from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loxian
> "After examining Loxian, Terry Dolan, a professor of English at University
> College Dublin, has offered his professional opinion regarding the
> language.
> "It's a very eclectic language. It seems to choose elements at random.
> (snip)... It is very mixum-gatherum
> linguistically - it seems to have no form of grammar or word order which
> has
> very limited comprehensibility. (snip)... A lot of thought has gone into
> it."
>
> Hey Dolan and Ryan. Come to CONLANG and see what a "lot of thought" about
> language invention has gone into our projects.
>
If only......:-))))))))))))))))))))