Je 10.13 atm 2006.06.29, Thomas ALEXANDER skribis

>With this in mind, a 20 minute conversation *about*
>Occidental might not fit the notion Don had in mind,
>even if he didn't say so in advance.  (Cxu ne, DonH?)

I didn't specify anything here, so as far as I am concerned a 
20-minute conversation in Occidental about Occidental qualifies. But 
it would have to be in Occidental (both sides).

>I'm wondering what the difference is between using
>Occidental to understand French and using, say,
>Italian to understand French.  One may argue (indeed,
>one has, and I've heard the arguments) that this or
>that Auxlang is better suited to such use than
>Italian is, but the extent of this has never been
>quantified in any way.  I suspect the quantity in
>question is fairly small (Don Harlow might argue
>based on Ionel's comments that the quantity is zero),
>and yet with Italian you have the added advantage of
>being able to communicate seamlessly with Italians.

I'm not sure what quantity we're talking about here, but I will 
reiterate earlier comments of mine that, as far as I can tell, 
naturalistic Romance IALs such as Occidental and Interlingua 
basically fall into the same linguistic ecological niche as, e.g., 
Italian and Portuguese.

Opinions (in English):
Esperanto (in English):
Literaturo (Esperante):