Proposal: Lojban, the logical language should be part of Constructed Languages

Since Lojban is a constructed language, it would be better to bring more support to an existing proposal, especially since constructed languages tend to have lots of overlap in expertise

share
2  
There was a discussion about this at the last Lojban proposal. – KSFT Oct 14 '16 at 23:22
    
Also a sub-topic of discuss.area51.stackexchange.com/questions/22947/… – Crissov Jan 16 at 15:03

The reason is simple: Lojban is an actual spoken language. While the Conlangs proposal discusses its languages in general, the Lojban proposal is for practical use of the language (among other purposes). That being said, discussing Lojban as a conlang on the would-be Constructed Languages would be OK; but as a language (a relatively popular one, in fact), it deserves its own place to live in.

share
8  
Basing the distinction between Lojban and other conlangs based on whether it has actual users is contrived. Lojban is not the only conlang that has speakers. The inclusion of Lojban looks more like a matter of viability on Stack Exchange. – Christophe Strobbe Nov 11 '16 at 11:44
3  
I think Esperanto is probably the only language that could be viable with its own stack exchange site. – Miles Rout Jan 4 at 3:01

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .