Conlang Mailing List – June 2005, week 5

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:

• ...But We Forgot To Figure Out How To Say "Conlang" In Hebrew
• Alborgian (3 messages)
• Conlang theses - meta (2 messages)
• Creakyness? (5 messages)
• fingers (2 messages)
• Fwd: Believing As Experiencer/Stimulus Versus Agent/Patient
• introduction Middelsprake (2 messages)
• introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs (5 messages)
• introduction Middelsprake: artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs
• List Problem (attn: Lord(s) of Instrumentality)
• META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (13 messages)
• META: what does "ObConLang" mean?
• META: what does "ObConLang" mean? (was:Re: Middelsprake : artlangs vs. auxlangs (2 messages)
• New listserv, better unicode? (2 messages)
• New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (13 messages)
• Non-polairty (3 messages)
• Offering linguistic papers... (4 messages)
• OT fingers and genealogy
• TECH: Short trip
• The future of (C-X-)SAMPA (was: New listserv, better unicode?) (9 messages)
• THEORY: a division of non-Personal tenses?
• THEORY: Are commands to believe infelicitous (3 messages)
• THEORY: Are commands to believe infelicitous?
• THEORY: Cases of Core Arguments in Clauses with Three Core Arguments (2 messages)
• THEORY: Cross-Referencing the Arguments of Consecutive Verbs, And Similar Things
• THEORY: Dative Movement, Applicative Voice, Valence-Changing Processes
• THEORY: Kinds of Plurals, and Methods of Indicating Them (was: Non-polarity)

1. ...But We Forgot To Figure Out How To Say "Conlang" In Hebrew
   • ...But We Forgot To Figure Out How To Say "Conlang" In Hebrew (51 lines)
     From: Steg Belsky <[log in to unmask]>

2. Alborgian
   • Alborgian (66 lines)
     From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Alborgian (55 lines)
     From: Shaul Vardi <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Alborgian (177 lines)
     From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <[log in to unmask]>

3. Conlang theses - meta
   • Re: Conlang theses - meta (89 lines)
     From: David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Conlang theses - meta (55 lines)
     From: Sai Emrys <[log in to unmask]>

4. Creakyness?
   • Re: Creakyness? (38 lines)
     From: Joseph Bridwell <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Creakyness? (58 lines)
     From: Carsten Becker <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Creakyness? (40 lines)
     From: caeruleancentaur <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Creakyness? (39 lines)
     From: Joseph Bridwell <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Creakyness? (45 lines)
     From: Joe <[log in to unmask]>

5. fingers
   • Re: fingers (64 lines)
     From: Thomas Wier <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: fingers (105 lines)
     From: Elliott Lash <[log in to unmask]>

6. Fwd: Believing As Experiencer/Stimulus Versus Agent/Patient
   • Fwd: Believing As Experiencer/Stimulus Versus Agent/Patient (155 lines)
     From: Tom Chappell <[log in to unmask]>

7. introduction Middelsprake
   • Re: introduction Middelsprake (80 lines)
     From: Julia "Schnecki" Simon <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: introduction Middelsprake (95 lines)
     From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <[log in to unmask]>

8. introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs
   • Re: introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs (51 lines)
     From: Stephen Mulraney <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs (65 lines)
     From: David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs (80 lines)
     From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs (55 lines)
     From: Carsten Becker <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs (104 lines)
     From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <[log in to unmask]>

9. introduction Middelsprake: artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs
   • Re: introduction Middelsprake: artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs (122 lines)
     From: Ray Brown <[log in to unmask]>

10. List Problem (attn: Lord(s) of Instrumentality)
    • List Problem (attn: Lord(s) of Instrumentality) (44 lines)
      From: Steg Belsky <[log in to unmask]>

11. META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake)
    • META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (76 lines)
      From: Ray Brown <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (99 lines)
      From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (57 lines)
      From: Stephen Mulraney <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (52 lines)
      From: David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (44 lines)
      From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (52 lines)
      From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (53 lines)
      From: Paul Bennett <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (52 lines)
      From: David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (63 lines)
      From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (56 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (69 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (35 lines)
      From: Jeffrey Jones <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META five posts a day limit( was: introduction Middelsprake) (49 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>

12. META: what does "ObConLang" mean?
    • Re: META: what does "ObConLang" mean? (59 lines)
      From: Herman Miller <[log in to unmask]>

13. META: what does "ObConLang" mean? (was:Re: Middelsprake : artlangs vs. auxlangs
    • META: what does "ObConLang" mean? (was:Re: Middelsprake : artlangs vs. auxlangs (44 lines)
      From: tomhchappell <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: META: what does "ObConLang" mean? (was:Re: Middelsprake : artlangs vs. auxlangs (48 lines)
      From: Paul Bennett <[log in to unmask]>

14. New listserv, better unicode?
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (37 lines)
      From: caeruleancentaur <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (59 lines)
      From: Paul Bennett <[log in to unmask]>

15. New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit)
    • New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (75 lines)
      From: taliesin the storyteller <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (61 lines)
      From: Paul Bennett <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (59 lines)
      From: taliesin the storyteller <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (48 lines)
      From: Stephen Mulraney <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (163 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (53 lines)
      From: kaleissin <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (44 lines)
      From: kaleissin <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (94 lines)
      From: Tim May <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (68 lines)
      From: Paul Bennett <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (33 lines)
      From: Joseph B. <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (43 lines)
      From: Stephen Mulraney <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (50 lines)
      From: Chris Bates <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: New listserv, better unicode? (was Re: META five posts a day limit) (62 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>

16. Non-polairty
    • Re: Non-polairty (42 lines)
      From: Alex Fink <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Non-polairty (55 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Non-polairty (184 lines)
      From: Remi Villatel <[log in to unmask]>

17. Offering linguistic papers...
    • Re: Offering linguistic papers... (83 lines)
      From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Offering linguistic papers... (40 lines)
      From: Joseph Bridwell <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Offering linguistic papers... (59 lines)
      From: Aidan Grey <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Offering linguistic papers... (55 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>

18. OT fingers and genealogy
    • Re: OT fingers and genealogy (57 lines)
      From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>

19. TECH: Short trip
    • TECH: Short trip (43 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>

20. The future of (C-X-)SAMPA (was: New listserv, better unicode?)
    • Re: The future of (C-X-)SAMPA (was: New listserv, better unicode?) (54 lines)
      From: Remi Villatel <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: The future of (C-X-)SAMPA (was: New listserv, better unicode?) (46 lines)
      From: Paul Bennett <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: The future of (C-X-)SAMPA (was: New listserv, better unicode?) (49 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: The future of (C-X-)SAMPA (was: New listserv, better unicode?) (42 lines)
      From: Stephen Mulraney <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: The future of (C-X-)SAMPA (was: New listserv, better unicode?) (42 lines)
      From: Amanda Babcock Furrow <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: The future of (C-X-)SAMPA (was: New listserv, better unicode?) (94 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: The future of (C-X-)SAMPA (was: New listserv, better unicode?) (175 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: The future of (C-X-)SAMPA (was: New listserv, better unicode?) (88 lines)
      From: Tim May <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: The future of (C-X-)SAMPA (was: New listserv, better unicode?) (59 lines)
      From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>

21. THEORY: a division of non-Personal tenses?
    • THEORY: a division of non-Personal tenses? (48 lines)
      From: Rodlox R <[log in to unmask]>

22. THEORY: Are commands to believe infelicitous
    • Re: THEORY: Are commands to believe infelicitous (85 lines)
      From: Joseph B. <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: THEORY: Are commands to believe infelicitous (85 lines)
      From: Sai Emrys <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: THEORY: Are commands to believe infelicitous (61 lines)
      From: Joseph B. <[log in to unmask]>

23. THEORY: Are commands to believe infelicitous?
    • Re: THEORY: Are commands to believe infelicitous? (134 lines)
      From: Tom Chappell <[log in to unmask]>

24. THEORY: Cases of Core Arguments in Clauses with Three Core Arguments
    • THEORY: Cases of Core Arguments in Clauses with Three Core Arguments (148 lines)
      From: Tom Chappell <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: THEORY: Cases of Core Arguments in Clauses with Three Core Arguments (110 lines)
      From: Rodlox R <[log in to unmask]>

25. THEORY: Cross-Referencing the Arguments of Consecutive Verbs, And Similar Things
    • THEORY: Cross-Referencing the Arguments of Consecutive Verbs, And Similar Things (184 lines)
      From: Tom Chappell <[log in to unmask]>

26. THEORY: Dative Movement, Applicative Voice, Valence-Changing Processes
    • THEORY: Dative Movement, Applicative Voice, Valence-Changing Processes (141 lines)
      From: Tom Chappell <[log in to unmask]>

27. THEORY: Kinds of Plurals, and Methods of Indicating Them (was: Non-polarity)
    • Re: THEORY: Kinds of Plurals, and Methods of Indicating Them (was: Non-polarity) (60 lines)
      From: tomhchappell <[log in to unmask]>