Conlang Mailing List – August 2010, 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:

• A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages) (10 messages)
• Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (12 messages)
• Derivational productivity (longish) (was: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit) (2 messages)
• Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang? (10 messages)
• Elision (was: [CONLANG] Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit) (3 messages)
• English disambiguation relexes
• First Fifty most frequently used morphemes in English (7 messages)
• Human vs.programming languages
• Human vs.programming languages (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?)
• Interrogative Cases
• Language Phrase Books (6 messages)
• Most recognised contemporary conlangs (2 messages)
• New SpecGram: A Primer in SF Xenolinguistics (3 messages)
• OT: Funny Website about Latin (9 messages)
• OT: Grave accent as opening quote (was Re: Elision (was: [CONLANG] Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit)) (2 messages)
• OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (15 messages)
• TECH: Converting MediaWiki markup to HTML (3 messages)
• Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (12 messages)
• TRANSLATION: A Single Volume Bound by Love (4 messages)
• Ultralingua (4 messages)
• Viernheim
• writing system

1. A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages)
   • Re: A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages) (72 lines)
     From: Alex Fink <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 21:45:54 -0400
   • Re: A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages) (41 lines)
     From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 18:19:29 -0700
   • Re: A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages) (26 lines)
     From: Micah Johnston <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 20:54:31 -0400
   • Re: A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages) (140 lines)
     From: Lee <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 19:10:33 -0700
   • Re: A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages) (118 lines)
     From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 17:05:31 -0700
   • Re: A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages) (56 lines)
     From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 18:54:49 -0500
   • Re: A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages) (44 lines)
     From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 15:42:24 -0700
   • Re: A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages) (96 lines)
     From: Garth Wallace <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 15:36:02 -0700
   • Re: A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages) (48 lines)
     From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 00:10:24 +0200
   • Re: A Robot's Natural Language (WAS: Human vs.programming languages) (88 lines)
     From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 14:56:35 -0700

2. Are right-branching languages easier to parse?
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (86 lines)
     From: Maxime Papillon <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 21:42:58 -0400
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (47 lines)
     From: Jim Henry <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 20:41:04 -0400
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (59 lines)
     From: Mechthild Czapp <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 23:29:44 +0200
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (64 lines)
     From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 11:19:11 -0700
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (39 lines)
     From: Micah Johnston <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 12:34:01 -0400
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (69 lines)
     From: Daniel Nielsen <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 08:02:51 -0500
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (60 lines)
     From: BPJ <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 13:18:06 +0200
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (49 lines)
     From: Daniel Nielsen <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 05:50:55 -0500
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (40 lines)
     From: Daniel Nielsen <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 21:20:23 -0500
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (165 lines)
     From: MorphemeAddict <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 17:38:09 -0400
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (148 lines)
     From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 22:36:55 +0200
   • Re: Are right-branching languages easier to parse? (123 lines)
     From: R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 20:14:58 +0100

3. Derivational productivity (longish) (was: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit)
   • Re: Derivational productivity (longish) (was: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit) (71 lines)
     From: Lars Finsen <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 11:52:54 +0200
   • Re: Derivational productivity (longish) (was: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit) (135 lines)
     From: BPJ <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 11:24:39 +0200

4. Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang?
   • Re: Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang? (148 lines)
     From: Samuel Stutter <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 13:46:00 +0100
   • Re: Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang? (108 lines)
     From: Matthew Nichols <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 22:13:10 -0700
   • Re: Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang? (38 lines)
     From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 21:55:11 -0700
   • Re: Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang? (78 lines)
     From: MorphemeAddict <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 23:17:10 -0400
   • Re: Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang? (65 lines)
     From: Lee <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 20:06:04 -0700
   • Re: Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang? (101 lines)
     From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 22:02:43 -0500
   • Re: Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang? (108 lines)
     From: MorphemeAddict <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 22:56:22 -0400
   • Re: Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang? (48 lines)
     From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 21:51:50 -0500
   • Re: Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang? (131 lines)
     From: Mechthild Czapp <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 04:38:11 +0200
   • Does anyone use the "-" symbol in his/her conlang? (90 lines)
     From: Daniel Bowman <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 22:23:03 -0400

5. Elision (was: [CONLANG] Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit)
   • Re: Elision (was: [CONLANG] Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit) (95 lines)
     From: Toms Deimonds Barvidis <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 20:40:13 +0300
   • Re: Elision (was: [CONLANG] Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit) (32 lines)
     From: Alex Fink <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 13:36:36 -0400
   • Re: Elision (was: [CONLANG] Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit) (78 lines)
     From: BPJ <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 13:05:41 +0200

6. English disambiguation relexes
   • English disambiguation relexes (223 lines)
     From: MorphemeAddict <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 18:08:56 -0400

7. First Fifty most frequently used morphemes in English
   • Re: First Fifty most frequently used morphemes in English (53 lines)
     From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 15:19:17 -0700
   • Re: First Fifty most frequently used morphemes in English (77 lines)
     From: MorphemeAddict <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 18:03:19 -0400
   • Re: First Fifty most frequently used morphemes in English (48 lines)
     From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 15:02:51 -0500
   • Re: First Fifty most frequently used morphemes in English (43 lines)
     From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 15:00:59 -0500
   • Re: First Fifty most frequently used morphemes in English (35 lines)
     From: Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 21:48:57 +0200
   • Re: First Fifty most frequently used morphemes in English (39 lines)
     From: Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 21:45:58 +0200
   • First Fifty most frequently used morphemes in English (31 lines)
     From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 12:01:36 -0700

8. Human vs.programming languages
   • Re: Human vs.programming languages (34 lines)
     From: J. 'Mach' Wust <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 18:11:34 -0400

9. Human vs.programming languages (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?)
   • Human vs.programming languages (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (148 lines)
     From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 23:03:58 +0200

10. Interrogative Cases
    • Re: Interrogative Cases (68 lines)
      From: maikxlx <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 01:38:52 -0400

11. Language Phrase Books
    • Re: Language Phrase Books (38 lines)
      From: Dale McCreery <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 10:55:42 -0700
    • Re: Language Phrase Books (49 lines)
      From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 16:21:11 -0500
    • Re: Language Phrase Books (46 lines)
      From: Douglas Koller <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 21:11:02 +0000
    • Re: Language Phrase Books (46 lines)
      From: Ph.D. <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 16:04:11 -0400
    • Re: Language Phrase Books (49 lines)
      From: Douglas Koller <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 18:28:16 +0000
    • Re: Language Phrase Books (46 lines)
      From: David McCann <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 17:01:03 +0100

12. Most recognised contemporary conlangs
    • Re: Most recognised contemporary conlangs (56 lines)
      From: Herman Miller <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 23:57:09 -0400
    • Re: Most recognised contemporary conlangs (80 lines)
      From: Sal Armoniac <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 12:17:24 -0400

13. New SpecGram: A Primer in SF Xenolinguistics
    • Re: New SpecGram: A Primer in SF Xenolinguistics (71 lines)
      From: Lee <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 09:54:29 -0700
    • Re: New SpecGram: A Primer in SF Xenolinguistics (61 lines)
      From: Krista Casada <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 08:37:17 -0500
    • New SpecGram: A Primer in SF Xenolinguistics (47 lines)
      From: David Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 00:21:47 -0700

14. OT: Funny Website about Latin
    • Re: OT: Funny Website about Latin (38 lines)
      From: Carsten Becker <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2010 00:22:30 +0200
    • Re: OT: Funny Website about Latin (56 lines)
      From: Lee <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 09:08:17 -0700
    • Re: OT: Funny Website about Latin (35 lines)
      From: David McCann <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 16:31:28 +0100
    • Re: OT: Funny Website about Latin (82 lines)
      From: Lars Finsen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 12:28:36 +0200
    • Re: OT: Funny Website about Latin (50 lines)
      From: Peter Bleackley <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 09:37:29 +0100
    • Re: OT: Funny Website about Latin (28 lines)
      From: Patrick Dunn <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 02:36:49 -0500
    • Re: OT: Funny Website about Latin (40 lines)
      From: Garth Wallace <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 00:30:31 -0700
    • Re: OT: Funny Website about Latin (26 lines)
      From: Matthew Turnbull <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 21:58:05 -0500
    • OT: Funny Website about Latin (28 lines)
      From: Vincent Pistelli <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 20:37:25 -0400

15. OT: Grave accent as opening quote (was Re: Elision (was: [CONLANG] Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit))
    • Re: OT: Grave accent as opening quote (was Re: Elision (was: [CONLANG] Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit)) (45 lines)
      From: Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2010 00:32:12 +0100
    • OT: Grave accent as opening quote (was Re: Elision (was: [CONLANG] Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit)) (75 lines)
      From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 18:08:54 -0500

16. OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?)
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (72 lines)
      From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 20:26:14 -0500
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (82 lines)
      From: Patrick Dunn <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 15:03:12 -0500
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (58 lines)
      From: Micah Johnston <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 15:31:36 -0400
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (60 lines)
      From: Patrick Dunn <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 13:46:20 -0500
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (40 lines)
      From: Garth Wallace <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 09:39:06 -0700
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (132 lines)
      From: R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 11:15:54 +0100
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (80 lines)
      From: Njenfalgar <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 10:32:29 +0200
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (187 lines)
      From: MorphemeAddict <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 22:31:44 -0400
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (67 lines)
      From: Lee <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 19:01:21 -0700
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (39 lines)
      From: Peter Collier <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 22:25:36 +0000
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (78 lines)
      From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 15:17:57 -0700
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (76 lines)
      From: Mechthild Czapp <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 23:39:14 +0200
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (171 lines)
      From: Mechthild Czapp <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 23:23:54 +0200
    • Re: OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (51 lines)
      From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 14:14:33 -0700
    • OT: Quantum physics and the mind (was: Are right-branching languages easier to parse?) (158 lines)
      From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 22:28:22 +0200

17. TECH: Converting MediaWiki markup to HTML
    • Re: TECH: Converting MediaWiki markup to HTML (57 lines)
      From: Rebecca Bettencourt <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 18:35:27 -0700
    • Re: TECH: Converting MediaWiki markup to HTML (41 lines)
      From: Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 22:10:44 +0200
    • TECH: Converting MediaWiki markup to HTML (33 lines)
      From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 13:58:51 -0500

18. Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit
    • Re: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (94 lines)
      From: Mechthild Czapp <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 01:44:25 +0200
    • Re: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (109 lines)
      From: Toms Deimonds Barvidis <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 22:26:55 +0300
    • Re: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (58 lines)
      From: John Q <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 13:11:28 -0400
    • Re: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (54 lines)
      From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 12:13:27 -0700
    • Re: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (46 lines)
      From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 11:54:27 -0700
    • Re: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (62 lines)
      From: Mechthild Czapp <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 20:36:25 +0200
    • Re: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (69 lines)
      From: Patrick Dunn <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 13:34:21 -0500
    • Re: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (48 lines)
      From: Douglas Koller <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 18:07:16 +0000
    • Re: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (40 lines)
      From: Jim Henry <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 13:10:10 -0400
    • Re: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (52 lines)
      From: Charlie <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 15:41:58 -0000
    • Re: Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (59 lines)
      From: Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 17:01:28 +0200
    • Translation excercise: Unabsteigbarkeit (57 lines)
      From: Mechthild Czapp <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 16:39:00 +0200

19. TRANSLATION: A Single Volume Bound by Love
    • Re: TRANSLATION: A Single Volume Bound by Love (93 lines)
      From: Mechthild Czapp <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 05:03:19 +0200
    • Re: TRANSLATION: A Single Volume Bound by Love (55 lines)
      From: Daniel Bowman <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 22:37:25 -0400
    • Re: TRANSLATION: A Single Volume Bound by Love (58 lines)
      From: Mechthild Czapp <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 23:07:42 +0200
    • TRANSLATION: A Single Volume Bound by Love (54 lines)
      From: Daniel Bowman <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 23:03:34 -0400

20. Ultralingua
    • Re: Ultralingua (44 lines)
      From: vii iiix <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 11:35:02 +1030
    • Re: Ultralingua (67 lines)
      From: Lee <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 12:47:14 -0700
    • Re: Ultralingua (44 lines)
      From: Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 18:36:20 +0200
    • Ultralingua (38 lines)
      From: Lee <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 08:19:48 -0700

21. Viernheim
    • Viernheim (32 lines)
      From: Peter Bleackley <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 10:16:22 +0100

22. writing system
    • writing system (45 lines)
      From: MorphemeAddict <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 14:50:31 -0400