Conlang
Mailing List July 2003, week 1
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:
Is this realistic?
Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
(2 messages)
Re: Re: † † † Is this realistic?
   Re: Re: â â â Is this realistic?
Amusing NATLANG (?) tidbit
ATTN: Roger Mills
(2 messages)
CHAT: Ben Franklin (was Re: Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation)
(2 messages)
CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(76 messages)
CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language andthe brain]
(2 messages)
Chat: Newbie introduction
Completely Offtopic, Lord of the Rings
(7 messages)
Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(21 messages)
Going nomail for a while...
(4 messages)
Going temporarily nomail
Interesting article
(2 messages)
Is this realistic?
(4 messages)
Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
(6 messages)
Japanese /r/ (was THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article])
L & R (was Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article])
META: Unmoderated Lists
(2 messages)
Methkaeki paternoster (Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives)
Natlang (Italian) Translation Question Help?
(4 messages)
new conlang: gmetma tirakem
Newbie introduction
(2 messages)
Newbie Question
(2 messages)
Non-human languages (was OT: Dolphin intelligence (...))
(5 messages)
Opinions wanted: person of vocative
(3 messages)
Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(47 messages)
OT (Episcopalian changes) Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
OT: CHAT:
OT: Dolphin intelligence (Re: Origin of names (WAS: Re: Proto-Uralic?))
(3 messages)
OT: Harrius Potter
OT: Japanese help
(6 messages)
OT: Lord's Prayer [Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives]
(9 messages)
OT: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(4 messages)
OT: time and religion and literature (was Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives)
(3 messages)
Proto-Uralic?
(2 messages)
Question about transitivity/intransitivity
Re: Is this realistic?
(2 messages)
Re: Re: Re: † † † Is this realistic?
SAMPA to Unicode tool
(5 messages)
Sonority of 'h'?
(6 messages)
The Classic of the Sixfold Path.
(3 messages)
THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(68 messages)
THEORY: language and the brain [was Re: Interesting article]
(2 messages)
Tolkien - List of his languages
(4 messages)
Translation exercise: "Thousand tongues" poem
(3 messages)
Two Questions for OurTongue
(4 messages)
UK conlangers: Voynich documentary on BBC tonight
Underwater languages (was Re: Newbie introduction)
USAGE: English vowels [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(2 messages)
USAGE: More Japanese
(12 messages)
Way OT: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
Weekly Vocab #13
Weekly Vocab 14
Weird language idea
(12 messages)
Wilkins' philosophical language in the news
Is this realistic?
Re: Is this realistic?
(103 lines)
From:
David J. Peterson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
Re: Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
(143 lines)
From:
David J. Peterson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
(67 lines)
From:
David J. Peterson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Re: † † † Is this realistic?
Re: Re: Re: † † † Is this realistic?
(135 lines)
From:
David J. Peterson <
[log in to unmask]
>
   Re: Re: â â â Is this realistic?
Re: Â Â Â Re: Re: â â â Is this realistic?
(51 lines)
From:
Rob Nierse <
[log in to unmask]
>
Amusing NATLANG (?) tidbit
Amusing NATLANG (?) tidbit
(43 lines)
From:
J Y S Czhang <
[log in to unmask]
>
ATTN: Roger Mills
ATTN: Roger Mills
(42 lines)
From:
J Y S Czhang <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: ATTN: Roger Mills
(41 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: Ben Franklin (was Re: Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation)
CHAT: Ben Franklin (was Re: Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation)
(66 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Ben Franklin (was Re: Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation)
(47 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(94 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(50 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(66 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(35 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(73 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(47 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(39 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(63 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(86 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(52 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(66 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(48 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(77 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(59 lines)
From:
Muke Tever <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(68 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(73 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(51 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(56 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(58 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(70 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(83 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(55 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(49 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(49 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(59 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(62 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(54 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(47 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(72 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(79 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(35 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(53 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(60 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(61 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(69 lines)
From:
taliesin the storyteller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(39 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(78 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(80 lines)
From:
michael poxon <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(42 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(65 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(51 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(98 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(53 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(64 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(75 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(66 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(65 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(66 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(42 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(42 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(65 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(43 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(54 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(37 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(47 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(36 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(56 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(51 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(59 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(53 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(59 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(83 lines)
From:
Ian Spackman <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(76 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(88 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(89 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(111 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(65 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(96 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(78 lines)
From:
taliesin the storyteller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(71 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(50 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(49 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(49 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(63 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(41 lines)
From:
Pavel Iosad <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(81 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language andthe brain]
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language andthe brain]
(51 lines)
From:
David Barrow <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: cultural interpretation [was Re: THEORY: language andthe brain]
(70 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Chat: Newbie introduction
Chat: Newbie introduction
(31 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Completely Offtopic, Lord of the Rings
Completely Offtopic, Lord of the Rings
(35 lines)
From:
Chris Bates <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Completely Offtopic, Lord of the Rings
(46 lines)
From:
Carlos Thompson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Completely Offtopic, Lord of the Rings
(50 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Completely Offtopic, Lord of the Rings
(44 lines)
From:
Julien Eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Completely Offtopic, Lord of the Rings
(40 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Completely Offtopic, Lord of the Rings
(32 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Completely Offtopic, Lord of the Rings
(38 lines)
From:
Mau Rauszer <
[log in to unmask]
>
Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(79 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(35 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(90 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(121 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(118 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(68 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(139 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(199 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(82 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(100 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(55 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(162 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(135 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(219 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(67 lines)
From:
Muke Tever <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(80 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(52 lines)
From:
Pavel Iosad <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(46 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(47 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(75 lines)
From:
Pablo David Flores <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
(156 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Going nomail for a while...
Going nomail for a while...
(39 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Going nomail for a while...
(64 lines)
From:
Nikhil Sinha <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Going nomail for a while...
(40 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Going nomail for a while...
(32 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Going temporarily nomail
Going temporarily nomail
(31 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Interesting article
Re: Interesting article
(68 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Interesting article
(48 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Is this realistic?
Is this realistic?
(33 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Is this realistic?
(44 lines)
From:
Garth Wallace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Is this realistic?
(40 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Is this realistic?
(23 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
(105 lines)
From:
David J. Peterson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
(94 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
(59 lines)
From:
Rob Nierse <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
(32 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
(48 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)
(34 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Japanese /r/ (was THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article])
Re: Japanese /r/ (was THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article])
(62 lines)
From:
BP Jonsson <
[log in to unmask]
>
L & R (was Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article])
L & R (was Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article])
(78 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
META: Unmoderated Lists
META: Unmoderated Lists
(30 lines)
From:
Jeffrey S. Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: META: Unmoderated Lists
(46 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Methkaeki paternoster (Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives)
Methkaeki paternoster (Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives)
(133 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Natlang (Italian) Translation Question Help?
Natlang (Italian) Translation Question Help?
(96 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlang (Italian) Translation Question Help?
(120 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlang (Italian) Translation Question Help?
(48 lines)
From:
Jeff Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlang (Italian) Translation Question Help?
(55 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
new conlang: gmetma tirakem
new conlang: gmetma tirakem
(43 lines)
From:
Robert B Wilson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Newbie introduction
Re: Newbie introduction
(42 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Newbie introduction
(58 lines)
From:
JS Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Newbie Question
Newbie Question
(65 lines)
From:
Andy <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Newbie Question
(36 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Non-human languages (was OT: Dolphin intelligence (...))
Non-human languages (was OT: Dolphin intelligence (...))
(107 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Non-human languages (was OT: Dolphin intelligence (...))
(89 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Non-human languages (was OT: Dolphin intelligence (...))
(134 lines)
From:
Sylvia Sotomayor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Non-human languages (was OT: Dolphin intelligence (...))
(151 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Non-human languages (was OT: Dolphin intelligence (...))
(40 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Opinions wanted: person of vocative
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocative
(285 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocative
(45 lines)
From:
John Leland <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocative
(72 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(74 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(113 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(71 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(112 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(153 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(60 lines)
From:
Muke Tever <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(43 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(49 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(40 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(102 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(128 lines)
From:
Elyse Grasso <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(96 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(35 lines)
From:
<Wilhelm Ulrich Schlaier> <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(66 lines)
From:
michael poxon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(94 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(51 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(75 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(59 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(53 lines)
From:
michael poxon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(60 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(42 lines)
From:
Ian Spackman <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(79 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(62 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(52 lines)
From:
John Leland <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(39 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(90 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(40 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(52 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(68 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(42 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(39 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(45 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(68 lines)
From:
Erich Rickheit KSC <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(77 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(62 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(52 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(41 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(60 lines)
From:
michael poxon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(38 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(41 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(51 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(42 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(50 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(57 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(44 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(55 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(35 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT (Episcopalian changes) Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
Re: OT (Episcopalian changes) Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(52 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: CHAT:
OT: CHAT:
(16 lines)
From:
Jeff Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: Dolphin intelligence (Re: Origin of names (WAS: Re: Proto-Uralic?))
Re: OT: Dolphin intelligence (Re: Origin of names (WAS: Re: Proto-Uralic?))
(40 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Dolphin intelligence (Re: Origin of names (WAS: Re: Proto-Uralic?))
(70 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Dolphin intelligence (Re: Origin of names (WAS: Re: Proto-Uralic?))
(39 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: Harrius Potter
OT: Harrius Potter
(71 lines)
From:
Thomas Leigh <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: Japanese help
OT: Japanese help
(51 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Japanese help
(62 lines)
From:
Garth Wallace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Japanese help
(97 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Japanese help
(83 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Japanese help
(77 lines)
From:
Garth Wallace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Japanese help
(32 lines)
From:
mathias <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: Lord's Prayer [Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives]
OT: Lord's Prayer [Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives]
(76 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: Lord's Prayer [Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives]
(40 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Lord's Prayer [Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives]
(34 lines)
From:
<Wilhelm Ulrich Schlaier> <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Lord's Prayer [Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives]
(24 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Lord's Prayer [Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives]
(38 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Lord's Prayer [Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives]
(43 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Lord's Prayer [Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives]
(36 lines)
From:
<Wilhelm Ulrich Schlaier> <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Lord's Prayer [Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives]
(47 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Lord's Prayer [Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives]
(51 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
OT: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(34 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(31 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(40 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(43 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: time and religion and literature (was Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives)
OT: time and religion and literature (was Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives)
(73 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: time and religion and literature (was Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives)
(65 lines)
From:
michael poxon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT: time and religion and literature (was Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives)
(66 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Proto-Uralic?
Re: Proto-Uralic?
(60 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proto-Uralic?
(48 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Question about transitivity/intransitivity
Re: Question about transitivity/intransitivity
(60 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Is this realistic?
Re: Re: Is this realistic?
(63 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Re: Is this realistic?
(56 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Re: Re: † † † Is this realistic?
Re: Re: Re: Re: † † † Is this realistic?
(148 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
SAMPA to Unicode tool
SAMPA to Unicode tool
(472 lines)
From:
Julien Eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: SAMPA to Unicode tool
(51 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: SAMPA to Unicode tool
(47 lines)
From:
Julien Eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: SAMPA to Unicode tool
(68 lines)
From:
JS Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: SAMPA to Unicode tool
(54 lines)
From:
Julien Eychenne <
[log in to unmask]
>
Sonority of 'h'?
Re: Sonority of 'h'?
(46 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Sonority of 'h'?
(36 lines)
From:
Amanda Babcock <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Sonority of 'h'?
(45 lines)
From:
Amanda Babcock <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Sonority of 'h'?
(43 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Sonority of 'h'?
(44 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Sonority of 'h'?
(46 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
The Classic of the Sixfold Path.
The Classic of the Sixfold Path.
(266 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: The Classic of the Sixfold Path.
(67 lines)
From:
JS Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: The Classic of the Sixfold Path.
(85 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(91 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(73 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(38 lines)
From:
Chris Bates <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(69 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(49 lines)
From:
Chris Bates <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(92 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(52 lines)
From:
Ian Spackman <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(32 lines)
From:
Chris Bates <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(78 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(56 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(54 lines)
From:
Chris Bates <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(40 lines)
From:
Chris Bates <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(53 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(51 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(74 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(46 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(61 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(44 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(40 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(32 lines)
From:
John Leland <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(50 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(38 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(49 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(48 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(46 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(49 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(33 lines)
From:
daniel andreasson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(48 lines)
From:
Nik Taylor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(41 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(53 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(57 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(32 lines)
From:
Mike Ellis <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(66 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(58 lines)
From:
Dan Sulani <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(58 lines)
From:
Chris Bates <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(55 lines)
From:
Chris Bates <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(63 lines)
From:
Chris Bates <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(85 lines)
From:
Chris Bates <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(66 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(68 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(54 lines)
From:
Ian Spackman <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(72 lines)
From:
Ian Spackman <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(82 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(72 lines)
From:
Chris Bates <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(76 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(81 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(76 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(61 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(36 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(102 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(49 lines)
From:
Amanda Babcock <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(52 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(47 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(50 lines)
From:
Steg Belsky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(47 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(73 lines)
From:
JS Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(69 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(51 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(24 lines)
From:
John Leland <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(41 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(34 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(43 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(39 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(47 lines)
From:
Ian Spackman <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(38 lines)
From:
Pavel Iosad <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(54 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(53 lines)
From:
Apollo Hogan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [Interesting article]
(71 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY: language and the brain [was Re: Interesting article]
THEORY: language and the brain [was Re: Interesting article]
(106 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: language and the brain [was Re: Interesting article]
(49 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Tolkien - List of his languages
Tolkien - List of his languages
(29 lines)
From:
Abrigon Gusiq <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Tolkien - List of his languages
(50 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Tolkien - List of his languages
(41 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Tolkien - List of his languages
(50 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Translation exercise: "Thousand tongues" poem
Translation exercise: "Thousand tongues" poem
(182 lines)
From:
Carlos Thompson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Translation exercise: "Thousand tongues" poem
(124 lines)
From:
Costentin Cornomorus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Translation exercise: "Thousand tongues" poem
(39 lines)
From:
John Leland <
[log in to unmask]
>
Two Questions for OurTongue
Two Questions for OurTongue
(38 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Two Questions for OurTongue
(60 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Two Questions for OurTongue
(57 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Two Questions for OurTongue
(50 lines)
From:
Rob Haden <
[log in to unmask]
>
UK conlangers: Voynich documentary on BBC tonight
UK conlangers: Voynich documentary on BBC tonight
(45 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Underwater languages (was Re: Newbie introduction)
Underwater languages (was Re: Newbie introduction)
(89 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
USAGE: English vowels [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
USAGE: English vowels [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(78 lines)
From:
Thomas R. Wier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: English vowels [was Re: THEORY: language and the brain]
(51 lines)
From:
Tristan <
[log in to unmask]
>
USAGE: More Japanese
USAGE: More Japanese
(69 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: More Japanese
(82 lines)
From:
Jeff Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: More Japanese
(93 lines)
From:
Garth Wallace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: More Japanese
(71 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: More Japanese
(85 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: More Japanese
(86 lines)
From:
Jeff Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: More Japanese
(65 lines)
From:
Garth Wallace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: More Japanese
(71 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: More Japanese
(63 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: More Japanese
(48 lines)
From:
Jeff Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: More Japanese
(78 lines)
From:
Jeff Jones <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: USAGE: More Japanese
(50 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Way OT: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
Way OT: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives
(76 lines)
From:
Stone Gordonssen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Weekly Vocab #13
Re: Weekly Vocab #13
(113 lines)
From:
Christian Thalmann <
[log in to unmask]
>
Weekly Vocab 14
Weekly Vocab 14
(50 lines)
From:
Christopher Wright <
[log in to unmask]
>
Weird language idea
Weird language idea
(34 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Weird language idea
(59 lines)
From:
Christian Thalmann <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Weird language idea
(50 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Weird language idea
(54 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Weird language idea
(72 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Weird language idea
(63 lines)
From:
Christian Thalmann <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Weird language idea
(63 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Weird language idea
(84 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Weird language idea
(44 lines)
From:
Mark J. Reed <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Weird language idea
(60 lines)
From:
Joe <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Weird language idea
(66 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Weird language idea
(46 lines)
From:
John Cowan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Wilkins' philosophical language in the news
Re: Wilkins' philosophical language in the news
(66 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire <
[log in to unmask]
>
Back to the main CONLANG page
LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU