Conlang Mailing List – June 2008, week 2

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:

• "Barely but booleanly" (9 messages)
• "to be" or "not to be" (13 messages)
• Additonal features for CALS (12 messages)
• Announcing the open beta of CALS (14 messages)
• Cleveland conlanger makes the papers (3 messages)
• Exhibit Coverage Continues! (11 messages)
• Fwd: Additonal features for CALS
• Holiday on Cindu!! (3 messages)
• Kamakawi Orthography Page
• Langmaker down since January? (24 messages)
• lexicographers (was; Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (8 messages)
• Making your language sound nice (7 messages)
• Monster phonology in need of romanization help (3 messages)
• NUMBERS (3 messages)
• OT: Double asterisk (11 messages)
• OT: Double asterisk (was Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues!) (2 messages)
• OT: Looking for Dutch children's song (4 messages)
• OT: Silent last letters, pluralization, and possessive formation in English (was Re: Langmaker down since January?) (6 messages)
• Update
• YAEPT Re: [CONLANG] Langmaker down since January?
• [ANNOUNCE] Conlang film in production, comments requested

1. "Barely but booleanly"
   • Re: "Barely but booleanly" (72 lines)
     From: Kelly Alioth Drinkwater <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "Barely but booleanly" (38 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]
   • Re: "Barely but booleanly" (47 lines)
     From: Kelly Alioth Drinkwater <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "Barely but booleanly" (40 lines)
     From: Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "Barely but booleanly" (53 lines)
     From: Kelly Alioth Drinkwater <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "Barely but booleanly" (60 lines)
     From: Edward Miller <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "Barely but booleanly" (71 lines)
     From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "Barely but booleanly" (33 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]
   • Re: "Barely but booleanly" (42 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]

2. "to be" or "not to be"
   • "to be" or "not to be" (52 lines)
     From: Scotto Hlad <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (60 lines)
     From: David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (58 lines)
     From: Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (60 lines)
     From: ROGER MILLS <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (96 lines)
     From: Scotto Hlad <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (45 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (40 lines)
     From: Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (106 lines)
     From: David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (71 lines)
     From: Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (65 lines)
     From: ROGER MILLS <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (55 lines)
     From: David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (138 lines)
     From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: "to be" or "not to be" (54 lines)
     From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>

3. Additonal features for CALS
   • Additonal features for CALS (35 lines)
     From: kaleissin <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Additonal features for CALS (56 lines)
     From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Additonal features for CALS (58 lines)
     From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Additonal features for CALS (50 lines)
     From: Benct Philip Jonsson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Additonal features for CALS (62 lines)
     From: Arnt Richard Johansen <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Additonal features for CALS (36 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]
   • Re: Additonal features for CALS (98 lines)
     From: JR <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Additonal features for CALS (102 lines)
     From: Herman Miller <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Additonal features for CALS (60 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]
   • Re: Additonal features for CALS (193 lines)
     From: JR <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Additonal features for CALS (41 lines)
     From: Ph. D. <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Additonal features for CALS (42 lines)
     From: Jim Henry <[log in to unmask]>

4. Announcing the open beta of CALS
   • Announcing the open beta of CALS (40 lines)
     From: kaleissin <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (45 lines)
     From: Carsten Becker <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (49 lines)
     From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (42 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (52 lines)
     From: And Rosta <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (50 lines)
     From: Carsten Becker <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (33 lines)
     From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (116 lines)
     From: David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (44 lines)
     From: Carsten Becker <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (41 lines)
     From: Herman Miller <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (59 lines)
     From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (77 lines)
     From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (29 lines)
     From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Announcing the open beta of CALS (46 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]

5. Cleveland conlanger makes the papers
   • Cleveland conlanger makes the papers (27 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]
   • Re: Cleveland conlanger makes the papers (44 lines)
     From: Dirk Elzinga <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Cleveland conlanger makes the papers (32 lines)
     From: Sai Emrys <[log in to unmask]>

6. Exhibit Coverage Continues!
   • Exhibit Coverage Continues! (30 lines)
     From: Donald Boozer <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (30 lines)
     From: Rick Harrison <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (51 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]
   • Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (39 lines)
     From: Benct Philip Jonsson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (56 lines)
     From: David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (29 lines)
     From: Rick Harrison <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (47 lines)
     From: Sai Emrys <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (42 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]
   • Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (46 lines)
     From: Carsten Becker <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (42 lines)
     From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (44 lines)
     From: Carsten Becker <[log in to unmask]>

7. Fwd: Additonal features for CALS
   • Fwd: Additonal features for CALS (62 lines)
     From: kaleissin <[log in to unmask]>

8. Holiday on Cindu!!
   • Holiday on Cindu!! (38 lines)
     From: ROGER MILLS <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Holiday on Cindu!! (31 lines)
     From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Holiday on Cindu!! (58 lines)
     From: Scotto Hlad <[log in to unmask]>

9. Kamakawi Orthography Page
   • Re: Kamakawi Orthography Page (45 lines)
     From: Ph. D. <[log in to unmask]>

10. Langmaker down since January?
    • Langmaker down since January? (47 lines)
      From: Rebecca Bettencourt <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (37 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (36 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (39 lines)
      From: Benct Philip Jonsson <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (41 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (72 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (42 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (50 lines)
      From: Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (64 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (21 lines)
      From: Rick Harrison <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (70 lines)
      From: Andreas Johansson <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (81 lines)
      From: andrew <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (83 lines)
      From: David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (50 lines)
      From: Tristan McLeay <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (34 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (32 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (54 lines)
      From: andrew <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (35 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (40 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (79 lines)
      From: Michael Poxon <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (62 lines)
      From: Tristan McLeay <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (44 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (34 lines)
      From: Jeffrey Jones <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Langmaker down since January? (84 lines)
      From: Benct Philip Jonsson <[log in to unmask]>

11. lexicographers (was; Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues!
    • lexicographers (was; Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (43 lines)
      From: And Rosta <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: lexicographers (was; Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (62 lines)
      From: Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: lexicographers (was; Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (35 lines)
      From: Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: lexicographers (was; Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (39 lines)
      From: ROGER MILLS <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: lexicographers (was; Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (38 lines)
      From: Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: lexicographers (was; Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (42 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: lexicographers (was; Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (50 lines)
      From: Ph. D. <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: lexicographers (was; Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues! (54 lines)
      From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>

12. Making your language sound nice
    • Making your language sound nice (69 lines)
      From: Michael Martin <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Making your language sound nice (116 lines)
      From: David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Making your language sound nice (104 lines)
      From: Dirk Elzinga <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Making your language sound nice (68 lines)
      From: Douglas Treadwell <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Making your language sound nice (88 lines)
      From: Herman Miller <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Making your language sound nice (34 lines)
      From: Herman Miller <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Making your language sound nice (32 lines)
      From: Edgard Bikelis <[log in to unmask]>

13. Monster phonology in need of romanization help
    • Monster phonology in need of romanization help (108 lines)
      From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Monster phonology in need of romanization help (150 lines)
      From: ROGER MILLS <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Monster phonology in need of romanization help (53 lines)
      From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>

14. NUMBERS
    • NUMBERS (57 lines)
      From: janko gorenc <[log in to unmask]>
    • NUMBERS (53 lines)
      From: janko gorenc <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NUMBERS (62 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]

15. OT: Double asterisk
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (38 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (34 lines)
      From: Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (45 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (45 lines)
      From: Carsten Becker <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (44 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (47 lines)
      From: Carsten Becker <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (56 lines)
      From: ROGER MILLS <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (71 lines)
      From: Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (44 lines)
      From: Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (39 lines)
      From: Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (41 lines)
      From: And Rosta <[log in to unmask]>

16. OT: Double asterisk (was Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues!)
    • OT: Double asterisk (was Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues!) (34 lines)
      From: Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Double asterisk (was Re: Exhibit Coverage Continues!) (47 lines)
      From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>

17. OT: Looking for Dutch children's song
    • Re: OT: Looking for Dutch children's song (172 lines)
      From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Looking for Dutch children's song (197 lines)
      From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Looking for Dutch children's song (61 lines)
      From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Looking for Dutch children's song (48 lines)
      From: Chris Peters <[log in to unmask]>

18. OT: Silent last letters, pluralization, and possessive formation in English (was Re: Langmaker down since January?)
    • OT: Silent last letters, pluralization, and possessive formation in English (was Re: Langmaker down since January?) (76 lines)
      From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Silent last letters, pluralization, and possessive formation in English (was Re: Langmaker down since January?) (108 lines)
      From: Tristan McLeay <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Silent last letters, pluralization, and possessive formation in English (was Re: Langmaker down since January?) (73 lines)
      From: Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Silent last letters, pluralization, and possessive formation in English (was Re: Langmaker down since January?) (103 lines)
      From: Tristan McLeay <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Silent last letters, pluralization, and possessive formation in English (was Re: Langmaker down since January?) (82 lines)
      From: Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Silent last letters, pluralization, and possessive formation in English (was Re: Langmaker down since January?) (79 lines)
      From: Tristan McLeay <[log in to unmask]>

19. Update
    • Update (33 lines)
      From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>

20. YAEPT Re: [CONLANG] Langmaker down since January?
    • YAEPT Re: [CONLANG] Langmaker down since January? (56 lines)
      From: And Rosta <[log in to unmask]>

21. [ANNOUNCE] Conlang film in production, comments requested
    • [ANNOUNCE] Conlang film in production, comments requested (141 lines)
      From: Language Creation Society <[log in to unmask]>