Conlang
Mailing List February 2010, 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:
Aaalis Phonology, Orthography and Nominal Morphology
Alternative timelines (was: An orthographic monster)
(3 messages)
An orthographic monster
(6 messages)
another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS
CHAT: Computer Science: Natural Language Processing
(5 messages)
couple of algorithms for word-making from natlangs
(3 messages)
English sentences as conlang test
(8 messages)
First Draft Grammar for my Ideographic conlang Neoglyphic.
(8 messages)
FRENCH in the 16th Cent.
(4 messages)
LIST OPERATIONS: exceeding daily allowed number of emails
(2 messages)
My creation has escaped
(18 messages)
My easiest conlang yet
(2 messages)
Next screening of CONLANG (the movie): 2/24, NYC
OT TECH: HTML/CSS embedded fonts problem
(4 messages)
OT TECH: Keyboards and fonts on IPod Touch/IPhone.
(3 messages)
Polish Notation was: Re: Word Order and Conjunctions
(2 messages)
Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(26 messages)
Right-branching vs. Left-branching
(7 messages)
Romance stressed vowels (was: muta cum liquida)
TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(12 messages)
Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(11 messages)
Why do humans not have stack-based languages? (was: Right-branching vs. Left-branching)
(3 messages)
Aaalis Phonology, Orthography and Nominal Morphology
Re: Aaalis Phonology, Orthography and Nominal Morphology
(101 lines)
From:
Dirk Elzinga <
[log in to unmask]
>
Alternative timelines (was: An orthographic monster)
Alternative timelines (was: An orthographic monster)
(78 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Alternative timelines (was: An orthographic monster)
(107 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Alternative timelines (was: An orthographic monster)
(114 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
An orthographic monster
Re: An orthographic monster
(123 lines)
From:
Benct Philip Jonsson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: An orthographic monster
(30 lines)
From:
Benct Philip Jonsson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: An orthographic monster
(49 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: An orthographic monster
(120 lines)
From:
Benct Philip Jonsson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: An orthographic monster
(112 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: An orthographic monster
(197 lines)
From:
Benct Philip Jonsson <
[log in to unmask]
>
another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS
another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS
(24 lines)
From:
MorphemeAddict <
[log in to unmask]
>
CHAT: Computer Science: Natural Language Processing
CHAT: Computer Science: Natural Language Processing
(63 lines)
From:
Iain Davis <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Computer Science: Natural Language Processing
(84 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Computer Science: Natural Language Processing
(34 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Computer Science: Natural Language Processing
(47 lines)
From:
Iain Davis <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: CHAT: Computer Science: Natural Language Processing
(53 lines)
From:
Daniel Demski <
[log in to unmask]
>
couple of algorithms for word-making from natlangs
couple of algorithms for word-making from natlangs
(57 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: couple of algorithms for word-making from natlangs
(68 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: couple of algorithms for word-making from natlangs
(39 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
English sentences as conlang test
English sentences as conlang test
(41 lines)
From:
MorphemeAddict <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: English sentences as conlang test
(81 lines)
From:
David E <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: English sentences as conlang test
(68 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: English sentences as conlang test
(89 lines)
From:
MorphemeAddict <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: English sentences as conlang test
(106 lines)
From:
Douglas Koller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: English sentences as conlang test
(69 lines)
From:
Mechthild Czapp <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: English sentences as conlang test
(38 lines)
From:
Lee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: English sentences as conlang test
(83 lines)
From:
Herman Miller <
[log in to unmask]
>
First Draft Grammar for my Ideographic conlang Neoglyphic.
First Draft Grammar for my Ideographic conlang Neoglyphic.
(281 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: First Draft Grammar for my Ideographic conlang Neoglyphic.
(45 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: First Draft Grammar for my Ideographic conlang Neoglyphic.
(73 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: First Draft Grammar for my Ideographic conlang Neoglyphic.
(65 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: First Draft Grammar for my Ideographic conlang Neoglyphic.
(40 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: First Draft Grammar for my Ideographic conlang Neoglyphic.
(90 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: First Draft Grammar for my Ideographic conlang Neoglyphic.
(48 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: First Draft Grammar for my Ideographic conlang Neoglyphic.
(64 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
FRENCH in the 16th Cent.
FRENCH in the 16th Cent.
(42 lines)
From:
John Lategan <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: FRENCH in the 16th Cent.
(38 lines)
From:
David McCann <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: FRENCH in the 16th Cent.
(51 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: FRENCH in the 16th Cent.
(58 lines)
From:
Tony Harris <
[log in to unmask]
>
LIST OPERATIONS: exceeding daily allowed number of emails
LIST OPERATIONS: exceeding daily allowed number of emails
(26 lines)
From:
MorphemeAddict <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: LIST OPERATIONS: exceeding daily allowed number of emails
(36 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
My creation has escaped
My creation has escaped
(40 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(41 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(67 lines)
From:
Tony Harris <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(81 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(47 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(39 lines)
From:
Michael Poxon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(42 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(54 lines)
From:
Mechthild Czapp <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(54 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(53 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(60 lines)
From:
Tony Harris <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(73 lines)
From:
Andreas Johansson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(54 lines)
From:
Tony Harris <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(63 lines)
From:
Lee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(74 lines)
From:
Lee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(42 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(48 lines)
From:
Carsten Becker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My creation has escaped
(44 lines)
From:
Rebecca Bettencourt <
[log in to unmask]
>
My easiest conlang yet
Re: My easiest conlang yet
(81 lines)
From:
Daniel Demski <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: My easiest conlang yet
(62 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Next screening of CONLANG (the movie): 2/24, NYC
Next screening of CONLANG (the movie): 2/24, NYC
(36 lines)
From:
Sai Emrys <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT TECH: HTML/CSS embedded fonts problem
Re: OT TECH: HTML/CSS embedded fonts problem
(53 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT TECH: HTML/CSS embedded fonts problem
(64 lines)
From:
Carsten Becker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT TECH: HTML/CSS embedded fonts problem
(72 lines)
From:
Lee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT TECH: HTML/CSS embedded fonts problem
(48 lines)
From:
Carsten Becker <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT TECH: Keyboards and fonts on IPod Touch/IPhone.
OT TECH: Keyboards and fonts on IPod Touch/IPhone.
(32 lines)
From:
<deinx nxtxr> <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT TECH: Keyboards and fonts on IPod Touch/IPhone.
(38 lines)
From:
Lee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT TECH: Keyboards and fonts on IPod Touch/IPhone.
(43 lines)
From:
<deinx nxtxr> <
[log in to unmask]
>
Polish Notation was: Re: Word Order and Conjunctions
Re: Polish Notation was: Re: Word Order and Conjunctions
(111 lines)
From:
MorphemeAddict <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Polish Notation was: Re: Word Order and Conjunctions
(120 lines)
From:
Eldin Raigmore <
[log in to unmask]
>
Proper Names in a Soundless Language
Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(56 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(68 lines)
From:
MorphemeAddict <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(37 lines)
From:
Kelvin Jackson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(38 lines)
From:
Karen Badham <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(65 lines)
From:
Samuel Stutter <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(96 lines)
From:
Samuel Stutter <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(98 lines)
From:
MorphemeAddict <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(44 lines)
From:
Karen Badham <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(71 lines)
From:
Patrick Dunn <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(56 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(97 lines)
From:
Lee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(57 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(76 lines)
From:
Patrick Dunn <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(92 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(69 lines)
From:
Lee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(72 lines)
From:
MorphemeAddict <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(34 lines)
From:
René Uittenbogaard <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(41 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(32 lines)
From:
<deinx nxtxr> <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(59 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(63 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(68 lines)
From:
MorphemeAddict <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(55 lines)
From:
Chris Peters <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(47 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(75 lines)
From:
<deinx nxtxr> <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Proper Names in a Soundless Language
(89 lines)
From:
MorphemeAddict <
[log in to unmask]
>
Right-branching vs. Left-branching
Re: Right-branching vs. Left-branching
(33 lines)
From:
John Vertical <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Right-branching vs. Left-branching
(52 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Right-branching vs. Left-branching
(91 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Right-branching vs. Left-branching
(31 lines)
From:
Nokta Kanto <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Right-branching vs. Left-branching
(47 lines)
From:
MorphemeAddict <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Right-branching vs. Left-branching
(35 lines)
From:
Nokta Kanto <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Right-branching vs. Left-branching
(61 lines)
From:
Mechthild Czapp <
[log in to unmask]
>
Romance stressed vowels (was: muta cum liquida)
Re: Romance stressed vowels (was: muta cum liquida)
(100 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(29 lines)
From:
Ollock Ackeop <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(40 lines)
From:
Larry Sulky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(42 lines)
From:
Tim Smith <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(56 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(59 lines)
From:
calculator ftvb <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(46 lines)
From:
Larry Sulky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(48 lines)
From:
- <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(48 lines)
From:
Lee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(65 lines)
From:
Claude Almansi <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(48 lines)
From:
David McCann <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(59 lines)
From:
Tony Harris <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: TECH WTF downloading pages? (was: another self-defining message for CETI: CosmicOS)
(30 lines)
From:
Sai Emrys <
[log in to unmask]
>
Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
Re: Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(35 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(61 lines)
From:
Tony Harris <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(52 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(50 lines)
From:
Daniel Bowman <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(64 lines)
From:
Daniel Bowman <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(45 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(71 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(43 lines)
From:
Amanda Babcock Furrow <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(55 lines)
From:
Tony Harris <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(42 lines)
From:
<deinx nxtxr> <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Think of conlanging from languages backwards?
(51 lines)
From:
John Vertical <
[log in to unmask]
>
Why do humans not have stack-based languages? (was: Right-branching vs. Left-branching)
Why do humans not have stack-based languages? (was: Right-branching vs. Left-branching)
(55 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Why do humans not have stack-based languages? (was: Right-branching vs. Left-branching)
(52 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Why do humans not have stack-based languages? (was: Right-branching vs. Left-branching)
(86 lines)
From:
Lee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Back to the main CONLANG page
LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU