Conlang
Mailing List May 2002, week 4
Sort by
Author
|
Date
| Topic
Chronologically |
Most recent first
Options
Show author |
Hide author
Show table of contents |
Hide table of contents
Navigation
Back to main CONLANG page
Join or leave CONLANG (or change settings)
Search Archives
Table of contents:
(chat) Yoda's word order
(8 messages)
5th Century Brythonic
<No subject>
(3 messages)
A New Accent, Political Boundaries and Accents,
(3 messages)
A new endeavour of mine...
(6 messages)
A question on vowel orthography
(4 messages)
A Roman syllabary?
abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(19 messages)
Assyrian character
(6 messages)
ATTN: Virus Warning
(3 messages)
Case markings versus adpostions
(2 messages)
CHAT: Conlanging couples
(14 messages)
CHAT: return of the long-lost
(2 messages)
CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE:
CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE: irregular
(3 messages)
CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals
CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE:irregular
CHAT: suggest relocate thread (was RE: [CONLANG] THEORY: phonemics
Chinese (was: Optimum number of symbols)
Concalendrical reference point
(17 messages)
Conlang evolution
(4 messages)
Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(13 messages)
Dichotomies, trichotomies, polychotomies
(6 messages)
DISCUSSION, QUESTION: Verb conjugation by location
(6 messages)
Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,
(8 messages)
Epicene pronoun (was: French (was: Optimum number of symbols))
(9 messages)
Evolution WAS Re: Optimum number of symbols
(8 messages)
Featural Alphabet
French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(24 messages)
French (was: all sorts of stuff)
(4 messages)
French and English (was Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols)
(2 messages)
French and US high school language instruction
French and US high school language instruction (was: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(2 messages)
Fyksland Headline News Weekly - 200221
German final -g (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(6 messages)
Good day Mate
Hiksilipsi complex segments (was: RE: [CONLANG] me again
(4 messages)
I thought you were an Arab
(2 messages)
Interesting fonts
(3 messages)
Japanese (was Re: French)
(2 messages)
John Cowan's Little List of Scripts
Kash dictionary
Language Replacement (Re: French and US high school language instruction)
(3 messages)
Language subleties (Was: Re: Optimum number of symbols,)
me again
(4 messages)
METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃn dil
METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃn dil
(2 messages)
METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃndil
METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃndil Script Sample)
(2 messages)
Name of my conlang
(6 messages)
Neat morpheme in my conlang, and a new word
Neo-cuneifoem (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(2 messages)
Neuter girls (was Re: French)
New Relay!
(12 messages)
new to the list
(3 messages)
Optimum number of symbols
(129 messages)
Optimum number of symbols,
(6 messages)
Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(13 messages)
Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(2 messages)
OT: Quoting (was: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary)
(2 messages)
Poll by Email No. 12
(2 messages)
POLL: lablang/engelang (results)
Reduplication (was :Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,)
Relay list closed
Relay!
Relay! (was Re: Relay?)
(3 messages)
Relay?
(7 messages)
Results of Poll by Email No. 11
sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(18 messages)
Script
Script type
(8 messages)
Shavian rhotics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(4 messages)
Slightly OT - was Re: Optimum number of symbols
Some or any
(10 messages)
Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(10 messages)
Spoken Latin, Greek
Syllabic Abbreviations (was: Optimum number of symbols)
T-shirts are now available
(7 messages)
Teaching Reading in Hebrew (was Evolution)
The new Tirelat calendar
THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(43 messages)
THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
(10 messages)
THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(14 messages)
THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:[CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
THEORY: no more URs!
THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
(10 messages)
THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum
(3 messages)
THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(12 messages)
THEORY: Reduplication
(21 messages)
Unashamed WAS:Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
Universal Language Dictionary
unsubscribing
(2 messages)
USAGE: towing the line (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(4 messages)
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,
(4 messages)
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(2 messages)
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(12 messages)
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number ofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(5 messages)
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum numberofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(5 messages)
USAGE: yusta (was: RE: CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE: irregular
Vocab #6
Vocab #7
(2 messages)
Vocab #8
(3 messages)
Vocab #9
(7 messages)
Vocab #9 (cont'd)
Vocab #9 (corrections)
Wenetaic
What is an alphabet? Re: Optimum number of symbols
(2 messages)
YivrÃndil Script Sample
(3 messages)
(chat) Yoda's word order
(chat) Yoda's word order
(36 lines)
From:
Jake X <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: (chat) Yoda's word order
(38 lines)
From:
Christopher B Wright <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: (chat) Yoda's word order
(62 lines)
From:
Pavel Iosad <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: (chat) Yoda's word order
(55 lines)
From:
Christian Thalmann <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: (chat) Yoda's word order
(69 lines)
From:
Dirk Elzinga <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: (chat) Yoda's word order
(66 lines)
From:
Christian Thalmann <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: (chat) Yoda's word order
(133 lines)
From:
Dirk Elzinga <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: (chat) Yoda's word order
(47 lines)
From:
Christopher B Wright <
[log in to unmask]
>
5th Century Brythonic
5th Century Brythonic
(35 lines)
From:
andrew <
[log in to unmask]
>
<No subject>
<No subject>
(38 lines)
From:
Nihil Sum <
[log in to unmask]
>
<No subject>
(56 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
<No subject>
(48 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
A New Accent, Political Boundaries and Accents,
Re: A New Accent, Political Boundaries and Accents,
(48 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A New Accent, Political Boundaries and Accents,
(70 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A New Accent, Political Boundaries and Accents,
(39 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
A new endeavour of mine...
A new endeavour of mine...
(39 lines)
From:
a. koch <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A new endeavour of mine...
(52 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A new endeavour of mine...
(47 lines)
From:
JS Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A new endeavour of mine...
(83 lines)
From:
a. koch <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A new endeavour of mine...
(40 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A new endeavour of mine...
(58 lines)
From:
a. koch <
[log in to unmask]
>
A question on vowel orthography
Re: A question on vowel orthography
(37 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A question on vowel orthography
(38 lines)
From:
daniel andreasson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A question on vowel orthography
(43 lines)
From:
Lars Henrik Mathiesen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A question on vowel orthography
(55 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
A Roman syllabary?
A Roman syllabary?
(55 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(38 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(60 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(42 lines)
From:
Pavel Iosad <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(43 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(102 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(52 lines)
From:
Pavel Iosad <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(66 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(51 lines)
From:
Carlos Thompson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(32 lines)
From:
Lars Henrik Mathiesen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(46 lines)
From:
Pavel Iosad <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(47 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(41 lines)
From:
Lars Henrik Mathiesen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(42 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(48 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(79 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(80 lines)
From:
Carlos Thompson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(37 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(51 lines)
From:
Dirk Elzinga <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary
(45 lines)
From:
Carlos Thompson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Assyrian character
Assyrian character
(33 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Assyrian character
(42 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Assyrian character
(49 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Assyrian character
(38 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Assyrian character
(73 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Assyrian character
(42 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
ATTN: Virus Warning
ATTN: Virus Warning
(26 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: ATTN: Virus Warning
(57 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: ATTN: Virus Warning
(61 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Case markings versus adpostions
Case markings versus adpostions
(47 lines)
From:
Matthew Kehrt <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Case markings versus adpostions
(56 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: Conlanging couples
CHAT: Conlanging couples
(39 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(43 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(52 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: Conlanging couples
(57 lines)
From:
Kala Tunu <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(61 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(110 lines)
From:
Stephen DeGrace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(82 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(53 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(68 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(46 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(44 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(47 lines)
From:
Stephen DeGrace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(54 lines)
From:
BP Jonsson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(48 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: return of the long-lost
Re: CHAT: return of the long-lost
(39 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: return of the long-lost
(34 lines)
From:
Lars Henrik Mathiesen <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE:
Re: CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE:
(59 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE: irregular
Re: CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE: irregular
(42 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE: irregular
(57 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE: irregular
(59 lines)
From:
Tristan McLeay <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals
CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals
(63 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE:irregular
Re: CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE:irregular
(38 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: suggest relocate thread (was RE: [CONLANG] THEORY: phonemics
CHAT: suggest relocate thread (was RE: [CONLANG] THEORY: phonemics
(59 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Chinese (was: Optimum number of symbols)
Chinese (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(84 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Concalendrical reference point
Concalendrical reference point
(45 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(60 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(66 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(54 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(67 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(59 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(42 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(47 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(47 lines)
From:
Michael Poxon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(51 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(51 lines)
From:
J Y S Czhang <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(43 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(38 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(60 lines)
From:
Herman Miller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(43 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(43 lines)
From:
Maarten van Beek <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Concalendrical reference point
(43 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Conlang evolution
Conlang evolution
(47 lines)
From:
Christopher B Wright <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang evolution
(68 lines)
From:
Herman Miller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang evolution
(45 lines)
From:
Jesse Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang evolution
(39 lines)
From:
Aidan Grey <
[log in to unmask]
>
Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(70 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(37 lines)
From:
Josh Roth <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(43 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(43 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(63 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(44 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(53 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(87 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(58 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(48 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(42 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(63 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Consonant diacritics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(57 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Dichotomies, trichotomies, polychotomies
Dichotomies, trichotomies, polychotomies
(39 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dichotomies, trichotomies, polychotomies
(41 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dichotomies, trichotomies, polychotomies
(53 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dichotomies, trichotomies, polychotomies
(78 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dichotomies, trichotomies, polychotomies
(58 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dichotomies, trichotomies, polychotomies
(63 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
DISCUSSION, QUESTION: Verb conjugation by location
DISCUSSION, QUESTION: Verb conjugation by location
(67 lines)
From:
Karapcik, Mike <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: DISCUSSION, QUESTION: Verb conjugation by location
(36 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: DISCUSSION, QUESTION: Verb conjugation by location
(60 lines)
From:
Peter Clark <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: DISCUSSION, QUESTION: Verb conjugation by location
(37 lines)
From:
Matthew Kehrt <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: DISCUSSION, QUESTION: Verb conjugation by location
(92 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: DISCUSSION, QUESTION: Verb conjugation by location
(75 lines)
From:
Rik Roots <
[log in to unmask]
>
Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,
Re: Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,
(68 lines)
From:
J Y S Czhang <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,
(48 lines)
From:
J Y S Czhang <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,
(43 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,
(39 lines)
From:
wayne chevrier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,
(47 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,
(60 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,
(38 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,
(67 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Epicene pronoun (was: French (was: Optimum number of symbols))
Epicene pronoun (was: French (was: Optimum number of symbols))
(53 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Epicene pronoun (was: French (was: Optimum number of symbols))
(68 lines)
From:
Doug Dee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Epicene pronoun (was: French (was: Optimum number of symbols))
(53 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Epicene pronoun (was: French (was: Optimum number of symbols))
(36 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Epicene pronoun (was: French (was: Optimum number of symbols))
(50 lines)
From:
Muke Tever <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Epicene pronoun (was: French (was: Optimum number of symbols))
(56 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Epicene pronoun (was: French (was: Optimum number of symbols))
(36 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Epicene pronoun (was: French (was: Optimum number of symbols))
(38 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Epicene pronoun (was: French (was: Optimum number of symbols))
(40 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Evolution WAS Re: Optimum number of symbols
Evolution WAS Re: Optimum number of symbols
(62 lines)
From:
JS Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evolution WAS Re: Optimum number of symbols
(66 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evolution WAS Re: Optimum number of symbols
(77 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evolution WAS Re: Optimum number of symbols
(91 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evolution WAS Re: Optimum number of symbols
(140 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evolution WAS Re: Optimum number of symbols
(38 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evolution WAS Re: Optimum number of symbols
(153 lines)
From:
Kala Tunu <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evolution WAS Re: Optimum number of symbols
(99 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Featural Alphabet
Featural Alphabet
(78 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(223 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(252 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(73 lines)
From:
Jeff Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(88 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(173 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(45 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(55 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(48 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(104 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(99 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(153 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(56 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(59 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(59 lines)
From:
BP Jonsson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(54 lines)
From:
Michael Poxon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(41 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(66 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(80 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(79 lines)
From:
Clint Jackson Baker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(44 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(64 lines)
From:
Clint Jackson Baker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(42 lines)
From:
wayne chevrier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(45 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was Re: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(44 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
French (was: all sorts of stuff)
French (was: all sorts of stuff)
(38 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was: all sorts of stuff)
(57 lines)
From:
Julien EYCHENNE <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was: all sorts of stuff)
(50 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French (was: all sorts of stuff)
(50 lines)
From:
Clint Jackson Baker <
[log in to unmask]
>
French and English (was Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols)
French and English (was Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols)
(73 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French and English (was Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols)
(46 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
French and US high school language instruction
Re: French and US high school language instruction
(49 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
French and US high school language instruction (was: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
French and US high school language instruction (was: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(63 lines)
From:
nicole perrin <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: French and US high school language instruction (was: Re: Optimum number of symbols)
(120 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Fyksland Headline News Weekly - 200221
Fyksland Headline News Weekly - 200221
(45 lines)
From:
Kvasir - Vaijskä <
[log in to unmask]
>
German final -g (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
German final -g (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(83 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: German final -g (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(49 lines)
From:
Frank George Valoczy <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: German final -g (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(44 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: German final -g (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(59 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: German final -g (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(47 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: German final -g (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(35 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Good day Mate
Good day Mate
(53 lines)
From:
Cheng Zhong Su <
[log in to unmask]
>
Hiksilipsi complex segments (was: RE: [CONLANG] me again
Hiksilipsi complex segments (was: RE: [CONLANG] me again
(52 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Hiksilipsi complex segments (was: RE: [CONLANG] me again
(72 lines)
From:
JS Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Hiksilipsi complex segments (was: RE: [CONLANG] me again
(75 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Hiksilipsi complex segments (was: RE: [CONLANG] me again
(70 lines)
From:
JS Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
I thought you were an Arab
I thought you were an Arab
(99 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: I thought you were an Arab
(43 lines)
From:
Christian Thalmann <
[log in to unmask]
>
Interesting fonts
Interesting fonts
(28 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Interesting fonts
(39 lines)
From:
Aidan Grey <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Interesting fonts
(42 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Japanese (was Re: French)
Japanese (was Re: French)
(44 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Japanese (was Re: French)
(62 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
John Cowan's Little List of Scripts
John Cowan's Little List of Scripts
(55 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Kash dictionary
Kash dictionary
(32 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Language Replacement (Re: French and US high school language instruction)
Language Replacement (Re: French and US high school language instruction)
(120 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Language Replacement (Re: French and US high school language instruction)
(120 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Language Replacement (Re: French and US high school language instruction)
(90 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Language subleties (Was: Re: Optimum number of symbols,)
Language subleties (Was: Re: Optimum number of symbols,)
(75 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
me again
Re: me again
(66 lines)
From:
JS Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: me again
(42 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: me again
(58 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: me again
(71 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃn dil
Re: METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃn dil
(44 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃn dil
Re: METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃn dil
(46 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃn dil
(51 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃndil
Re: METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃndil
(47 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃndil Script Sample)
METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃndil Script Sample)
(58 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: METAFONT (Was: Re: YivrÃndil Script Sample)
(63 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Name of my conlang
Re: Name of my conlang
(51 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Name of my conlang
(74 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Name of my conlang
(54 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Name of my conlang
(48 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Name of my conlang
(37 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Name of my conlang
(51 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Neat morpheme in my conlang, and a new word
Neat morpheme in my conlang, and a new word
(66 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Neo-cuneifoem (was: Optimum number of symbols)
Neo-cuneifoem (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(77 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Neo-cuneifoem (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(75 lines)
From:
Paul Bennett <
[log in to unmask]
>
Neuter girls (was Re: French)
Neuter girls (was Re: French)
(48 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
New Relay!
New Relay!
(42 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Relay!
(55 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Relay!
(35 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Relay!
(24 lines)
From:
Balazs Sudar <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Relay!
(43 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Relay!
(52 lines)
From:
Jeff Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Relay!
(36 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Relay!
(48 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Relay!
(29 lines)
From:
Josh Roth <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Relay!
(33 lines)
From:
Josh Roth <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Relay!
(49 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Relay!
(40 lines)
From:
Jake X <
[log in to unmask]
>
new to the list
Re: new to the list
(46 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: new to the list
(53 lines)
From:
Clint Jackson Baker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: new to the list
(79 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Optimum number of symbols
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(45 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(150 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(50 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(45 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(59 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(41 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(33 lines)
From:
Balazs Sudar <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(62 lines)
From:
Kala Tunu <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(243 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(46 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(60 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(124 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(57 lines)
From:
Rik Roots <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(162 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(41 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(58 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(77 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(239 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Optimum number of symbols
(51 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(86 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(205 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(72 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(177 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(177 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(89 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(105 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(66 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(64 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(67 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(176 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(70 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(140 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(50 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(50 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(207 lines)
From:
Jake X <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(44 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(57 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(77 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(63 lines)
From:
JS Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(57 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(43 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(210 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(172 lines)
From:
David G. Durand <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(134 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(58 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(55 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(69 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(40 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(67 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(72 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(49 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(88 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(273 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(50 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(65 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(250 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(121 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(64 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(29 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(59 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(48 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(91 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(50 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(51 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(43 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(52 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(44 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(43 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(104 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(59 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(71 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(140 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(81 lines)
From:
Kala Tunu <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(74 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(40 lines)
From:
Barry Garcia <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(62 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(64 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(43 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(67 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(44 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(83 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(87 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(47 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(93 lines)
From:
David G. Durand <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(59 lines)
From:
David G. Durand <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(45 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(94 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(45 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(51 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(67 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(35 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(85 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(121 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(50 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(40 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(392 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(249 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(70 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(47 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(54 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(60 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(62 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(47 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(53 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(44 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(66 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(51 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(50 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(42 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(279 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(70 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(48 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(36 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(43 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(55 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(110 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(42 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(49 lines)
From:
Danny Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(72 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(47 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(82 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(108 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(57 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(47 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(67 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(67 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(42 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(38 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols
(47 lines)
From:
Dirk Elzinga <
[log in to unmask]
>
Optimum number of symbols,
Re: Optimum number of symbols,
(49 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols,
(66 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols,
(89 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols,
(44 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols,
(39 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols,
(43 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(152 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(44 lines)
From:
Jake X <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(148 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(69 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(78 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(68 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(60 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(67 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(50 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(69 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(56 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(97 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(34 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
Re: Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(49 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(66 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: Quoting (was: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary)
Re: OT: Quoting (was: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary)
(47 lines)
From:
Pavel Iosad <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Quoting (was: abugida vs abjad vs alphabet vs syllabary)
(47 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Poll by Email No. 12
Poll by Email No. 12
(72 lines)
From:
Peter Clark <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Poll by Email No. 12
(50 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
POLL: lablang/engelang (results)
Re: POLL: lablang/engelang (results)
(66 lines)
From:
Garrett Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
Reduplication (was :Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,)
Re: Reduplication (was :Dublex (was: Washing-machine words (was: Futurese, Chinese,)
(50 lines)
From:
Pavel Iosad <
[log in to unmask]
>
Relay list closed
Relay list closed
(62 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Relay!
Relay!
(38 lines)
From:
Nihil Sum <
[log in to unmask]
>
Relay! (was Re: Relay?)
Re: Relay! (was Re: Relay?)
(30 lines)
From:
Nihil Sum <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Relay! (was Re: Relay?)
(43 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Relay! (was Re: Relay?)
(37 lines)
From:
Matthew Kehrt <
[log in to unmask]
>
Relay?
Relay?
(49 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Relay?
(53 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Relay?
(44 lines)
From:
Matthew Kehrt <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Relay?
(39 lines)
From:
David Peterson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Relay?
(40 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Relay?
(55 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Relay?
(63 lines)
From:
Clint Jackson Baker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Results of Poll by Email No. 11
Results of Poll by Email No. 11
(88 lines)
From:
Peter Clark <
[log in to unmask]
>
sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(121 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(67 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(92 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(125 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(111 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(36 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(106 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(77 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(130 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(87 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(176 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(64 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(45 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(56 lines)
From:
Y.Penzev <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(48 lines)
From:
daniel andreasson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(47 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(49 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: sabyuka : consonants, orthography, and a few things more
(44 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Script
Script
(30 lines)
From:
Balazs Sudar <
[log in to unmask]
>
Script type
Script type
(42 lines)
From:
Maarten van Beek <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Script type
(37 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Script type
(76 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Script type
(44 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Script type
(40 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Script type
(39 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Script type
(44 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Script type
(60 lines)
From:
Dirk Elzinga <
[log in to unmask]
>
Shavian rhotics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
Shavian rhotics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(60 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Shavian rhotics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(65 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Shavian rhotics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(69 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Shavian rhotics (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(97 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Slightly OT - was Re: Optimum number of symbols
Slightly OT - was Re: Optimum number of symbols
(66 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Some or any
Some or any
(63 lines)
From:
Stephen DeGrace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Some or any
(97 lines)
From:
Muke Tever <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Some or any
(63 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Some or any
(58 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Some or any
(118 lines)
From:
Sylvia Sotomayor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Some or any
(102 lines)
From:
Stephen DeGrace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Some or any
(77 lines)
From:
Stephen DeGrace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Some or any
(83 lines)
From:
Stephen DeGrace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Some or any
(37 lines)
From:
Stephen DeGrace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Some or any
(108 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(94 lines)
From:
Clint Jackson Baker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(36 lines)
From:
Pavel Iosad <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(38 lines)
From:
Douglas Koller, Latin & French <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(55 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(47 lines)
From:
Clint Jackson Baker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(46 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(71 lines)
From:
Clint Jackson Baker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(49 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(43 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Spelling WASRe: Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(59 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Spoken Latin, Greek
Spoken Latin, Greek
(31 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Syllabic Abbreviations (was: Optimum number of symbols)
Syllabic Abbreviations (was: Optimum number of symbols)
(70 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
T-shirts are now available
T-shirts are now available
(32 lines)
From:
Mario Bonassin <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: T-shirts are now available
(57 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: T-shirts are now available
(38 lines)
From:
Peter Clark <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: T-shirts are now available
(40 lines)
From:
Mario Bonassin <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: T-shirts are now available
(80 lines)
From:
GrayWizard <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: T-shirts are now available
(20 lines)
From:
Mario Bonassin <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: T-shirts are now available
(43 lines)
From:
andrew <
[log in to unmask]
>
Teaching Reading in Hebrew (was Evolution)
Teaching Reading in Hebrew (was Evolution)
(66 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
The new Tirelat calendar
The new Tirelat calendar
(85 lines)
From:
Herman Miller <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(50 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(56 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(43 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(78 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(51 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(39 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(35 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(37 lines)
From:
a. koch <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(43 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(67 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(58 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(45 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(46 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(53 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(64 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(56 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(48 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(45 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(54 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(57 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(58 lines)
From:
Andrew Smith <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(48 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(63 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(36 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(46 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(60 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(64 lines)
From:
Michael Poxon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(38 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(38 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(37 lines)
From:
andrew <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(47 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(30 lines)
From:
Andrew Smith <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(34 lines)
From:
Andrew Smith <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(70 lines)
From:
Jake X <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(63 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(51 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(51 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(52 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(60 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(45 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(46 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(53 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:
(38 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
(39 lines)
From:
J Y S Czhang <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
(64 lines)
From:
J Y S Czhang <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
(87 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
(44 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
(56 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
(46 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
(51 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
(40 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
(45 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG]
(43 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(80 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(66 lines)
From:
Josh Roth <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(76 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(76 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(68 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(74 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(40 lines)
From:
Michael Poxon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(57 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(35 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(50 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(77 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(49 lines)
From:
Tim May <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(77 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(59 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:[CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
Re: THEORY/USAGE: irregular English plurals (was: RE:[CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(37 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY: no more URs!
Re: THEORY: no more URs!
(125 lines)
From:
Dirk Elzinga <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
(58 lines)
From:
Dirk Elzinga <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
(100 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
(79 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
(61 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
(100 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
(58 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
(44 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
(78 lines)
From:
Dirk Elzinga <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
(67 lines)
From:
Dirk Elzinga <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: no more URs! [was: Re: Optimum number of symbols]
(53 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum
(49 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum
(69 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum
(69 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(195 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(117 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(86 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(135 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(88 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(123 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(83 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(117 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(64 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(115 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(55 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: phonemics (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols
(30 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY: Reduplication
THEORY: Reduplication
(99 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(42 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(57 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(60 lines)
From:
Dirk Elzinga <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(48 lines)
From:
Jeffrey Henning <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(44 lines)
From:
Clint Jackson Baker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(67 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(62 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(48 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(40 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(41 lines)
From:
Kala Tunu <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(74 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(41 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(38 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(44 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(55 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(53 lines)
From:
julien eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(55 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(44 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(37 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Reduplication
(51 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Unashamed WAS:Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
Unashamed WAS:Re: CHAT: Conlanging couples
(47 lines)
From:
Clint Jackson Baker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Universal Language Dictionary
Re: Universal Language Dictionary
(132 lines)
From:
Herman Miller <
[log in to unmask]
>
unsubscribing
unsubscribing
(38 lines)
From:
Dan Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: unsubscribing
(41 lines)
From:
Mike S. <
[log in to unmask]
>
USAGE: towing the line (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
USAGE: towing the line (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(46 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: towing the line (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(52 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: towing the line (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(74 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: towing the line (was: THEORY: no more URs!)
(68 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number
(38 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,
(42 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,
(53 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,
(58 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,
(37 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(59 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols, though mostly talking about french now
(76 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(43 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(71 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(61 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(37 lines)
From:
Michael Poxon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(61 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(59 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(59 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(88 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(47 lines)
From:
Cheng Zhong Su <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(55 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(46 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number of symbols,though mostly talking about french now
(50 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number ofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number ofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(48 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number ofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(70 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number ofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(69 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number ofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(54 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum number ofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(66 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum numberofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum numberofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(44 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum numberofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(52 lines)
From:
Kendra <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum numberofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(67 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum numberofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(44 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: WOMYN (was: RE: [CONLANG] Optimum numberofsymbols,though mostly talking about french now
(58 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
USAGE: yusta (was: RE: CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE: irregular
USAGE: yusta (was: RE: CHAT: return of the long-lost (was: RE: THEORY/USAGE: irregular
(60 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Vocab #6
Re: Vocab #6
(76 lines)
From:
Herman Miller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Vocab #7
Re: Vocab #7
(120 lines)
From:
nicole dobrowolski <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vocab #7
(70 lines)
From:
Herman Miller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Vocab #8
Re: Vocab #8
(155 lines)
From:
Garrett Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vocab #8
(229 lines)
From:
Douglas Koller, Latin & French <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vocab #8
(167 lines)
From:
Christian Thalmann <
[log in to unmask]
>
Vocab #9
Vocab #9
(68 lines)
From:
Aidan Grey <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vocab #9
(69 lines)
From:
Muke Tever <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vocab #9
(35 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Vocab #9
(91 lines)
From:
Kala Tunu <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vocab #9
(70 lines)
From:
Muke Tever <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vocab #9
(70 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vocab #9
(44 lines)
From:
Muke Tever <
[log in to unmask]
>
Vocab #9 (cont'd)
Re: Vocab #9 (cont'd)
(83 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Vocab #9 (corrections)
Re: Vocab #9 (corrections)
(36 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Wenetaic
Re: Wenetaic
(54 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
What is an alphabet? Re: Optimum number of symbols
What is an alphabet? Re: Optimum number of symbols
(82 lines)
From:
Raymond Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: What is an alphabet? Re: Optimum number of symbols
(94 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
YivrÃndil Script Sample
YivrÃndil Script Sample
(47 lines)
From:
JS Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: YivrÃndil Script Sample
(51 lines)
From:
H. S. Teoh <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: YivrÃndil Script Sample
(48 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Back to the main CONLANG page
LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU