Conlang Mailing List – September 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:

• And/or
• Cheyoon (Mermish) Orthography (3 messages)
• Complete Annotated Na'gifi Fasu'xa Babel Text
• Elomi and Ilomi (2 messages)
• Feayran WAYK (4 messages)
• Graavgaaln grammar
• Graavgaaln phonology the syllable
• How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/? (10 messages)
• Internally Headed Relative Clauses
• Llárriésh (Llama) Trilinear Babel - Genesis 11:1-9
• Luggnaggian
• Marking of some nouns determined by properties of others (4 messages)
• missing posts (4 messages)
• Ná&#331;ifi Fasúxa Annotated Babel Text 11:1-3
• Na'vi Babel Text (3 messages)
• Na'vi Experts Camp (3 messages)
• Namespaces (4 messages)
• Naming systems
• NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (12 messages)
• Need help with phonetics/phonology at CALS (7 messages)
• Oligosynthesis (was:: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology) (2 messages)
• OT: Conlang Camping Trip (WAS: making an oral conlang) (3 messages)
• Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (41 messages)
• Reduncancy (6 messages)
• Teaching kids Klingon (humor) (5 messages)
• The 2010 Smiley Award Winner: amman iar (2 messages)
• Unnamed Language Phonology (2 messages)
• USAGE: how did English initial <x> come to be /z/? (3 messages)

1. And/or
   • Re: And/or (26 lines)
     From: Anthony Miles <[log in to unmask]>

2. Cheyoon (Mermish) Orthography
   • Re: Cheyoon (Mermish) Orthography (51 lines)
     From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Cheyoon (Mermish) Orthography (24 lines)
     From: Anthony Miles <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Cheyoon (Mermish) Orthography (34 lines)
     From: Anthony Miles <[log in to unmask]>

3. Complete Annotated Na'gifi Fasu'xa Babel Text
   • Complete Annotated Na'gifi Fasu'xa Babel Text (23 lines)
     From: Anthony Miles <[log in to unmask]>

4. Elomi and Ilomi
   • Elomi and Ilomi (22 lines)
     From: Anthony Miles <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Elomi and Ilomi (35 lines)
     From: Larry Sulky <[log in to unmask]>

5. Feayran WAYK
   • Feayran WAYK (52 lines)
     From: David Edwards <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Feayran WAYK (52 lines)
     From: David Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Feayran WAYK (142 lines)
     From: David Edwards <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: Feayran WAYK (37 lines)
     From: Miles Forster <[log in to unmask]>

6. Graavgaaln grammar
   • Re: Graavgaaln grammar (55 lines)
     From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>

7. Graavgaaln phonology the syllable
   • Re: Graavgaaln phonology the syllable (71 lines)
     From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>

8. How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/?
   • How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/? (21 lines)
     From: Nathan Unanymous <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/? (37 lines)
     From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/? (47 lines)
     From: David McCann <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/? (61 lines)
     From: Daniel Prohaska <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/? (52 lines)
     From: Daniel Prohaska <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/? (48 lines)
     From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/? (48 lines)
     From: Lars Finsen <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/? (61 lines)
     From: Alex Fink <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/? (69 lines)
     From: David McCann <[log in to unmask]>
   • Re: How did English <u> get /U/ and /V/? (47 lines)
     From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>

9. Internally Headed Relative Clauses
   • Internally Headed Relative Clauses (41 lines)
     From: neo gu <[log in to unmask]>

10. Llárriésh (Llama) Trilinear Babel - Genesis 11:1-9
    • Llárriésh (Llama) Trilinear Babel - Genesis 11:1-9 (103 lines)
      From: Richard Littauer <[log in to unmask]>

11. Luggnaggian
    • Re: Luggnaggian (43 lines)
      From: Matthew Turnbull <[log in to unmask]>

12. Marking of some nouns determined by properties of others
    • Marking of some nouns determined by properties of others (52 lines)
      From: Peter Bleackley <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Marking of some nouns determined by properties of others (54 lines)
      From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Marking of some nouns determined by properties of others (85 lines)
      From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Marking of some nouns determined by properties of others (73 lines)
      From: Peter Bleackley <[log in to unmask]>

13. missing posts
    • missing posts (25 lines)
      From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: missing posts (47 lines)
      From: Lee <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: missing posts (55 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
    • Re: missing posts (54 lines)
      From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>

14. Ná&#331;ifi Fasúxa Annotated Babel Text 11:1-3
    • Ná&#331;ifi Fasúxa Annotated Babel Text 11:1-3 (67 lines)
      From: Anthony Miles <[log in to unmask]>

15. Na'vi Babel Text
    • Na'vi Babel Text (61 lines)
      From: Richard Littauer <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Na'vi Babel Text (106 lines)
      From: Richard Littauer <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Na'vi Babel Text (235 lines)
      From: Samuel Stutter <[log in to unmask]>

16. Na'vi Experts Camp
    • Na'vi Experts Camp (118 lines)
      From: Richard Littauer <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Na'vi Experts Camp (38 lines)
      From: Brett Williams <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Na'vi Experts Camp (50 lines)
      From: Richard Littauer <[log in to unmask]>

17. Namespaces
    • Namespaces (45 lines)
      From: Logan Kearsley <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Namespaces (46 lines)
      From: Jim Henry <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Namespaces (57 lines)
      From: Logan Kearsley <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Namespaces (47 lines)
      From: Brett Williams <[log in to unmask]>

18. Naming systems
    • Re: Naming systems (51 lines)
      From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>

19. NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question
    • NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (41 lines)
      From: David Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (46 lines)
      From: Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (36 lines)
      From: <deinx nxtxr> <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (42 lines)
      From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (41 lines)
      From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (44 lines)
      From: Matthew Martin <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (101 lines)
      From: R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (37 lines)
      From: Anthony Miles <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (62 lines)
      From: Alex Fink <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (53 lines)
      From: Alex Fink <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (28 lines)
      From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: NATLANG: Isolating Languages Question (44 lines)
      From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>

20. Need help with phonetics/phonology at CALS
    • Re: Need help with phonetics/phonology at CALS (44 lines)
      From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Need help with phonetics/phonology at CALS (43 lines)
      From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Need help with phonetics/phonology at CALS (29 lines)
      From: Alex Fink <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Need help with phonetics/phonology at CALS (34 lines)
      From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Need help with phonetics/phonology at CALS (56 lines)
      From: David McCann <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Need help with phonetics/phonology at CALS (31 lines)
      From: Daniel Nielsen <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Need help with phonetics/phonology at CALS (39 lines)
      From: David McCann <[log in to unmask]>

21. Oligosynthesis (was:: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology)
    • Oligosynthesis (was:: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology) (69 lines)
      From: R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Oligosynthesis (was:: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology) (82 lines)
      From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>

22. OT: Conlang Camping Trip (WAS: making an oral conlang)
    • Re: OT: Conlang Camping Trip (WAS: making an oral conlang) (61 lines)
      From: Charlie <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Conlang Camping Trip (WAS: making an oral conlang) (42 lines)
      From: Charlie <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: OT: Conlang Camping Trip (WAS: making an oral conlang) (52 lines)
      From: <deinx nxtxr> <[log in to unmask]>

23. Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology
    • Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (49 lines)
      From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (36 lines)
      From: Jerry Muelver <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (31 lines)
      From: Logan Kearsley <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (23 lines)
      From: Larry Sulky <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (26 lines)
      From: Larry Sulky <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (46 lines)
      From: Lee <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (30 lines)
      From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (32 lines)
      From: Larry Sulky <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (52 lines)
      From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (38 lines)
      From: Brett Williams <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (48 lines)
      From: John Vertical <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (31 lines)
      From: Garth Wallace <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (38 lines)
      From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (67 lines)
      From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (58 lines)
      From: Larry Sulky <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (69 lines)
      From: Maxime Papillon <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (71 lines)
      From: Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (53 lines)
      From: Logan Kearsley <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (85 lines)
      From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (45 lines)
      From: Daniel Nielsen <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (75 lines)
      From: Logan Kearsley <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (70 lines)
      From: And Rosta <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (67 lines)
      From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (60 lines)
      From: Larry Sulky <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (70 lines)
      From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (71 lines)
      From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (100 lines)
      From: Larry Sulky <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (24 lines)
      From: Anthony Miles <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (38 lines)
      From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (36 lines)
      From: Larry Sulky <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (84 lines)
      From: And Rosta <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (81 lines)
      From: Gary Shannon <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (37 lines)
      From: neo gu <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (154 lines)
      From: R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (91 lines)
      From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (45 lines)
      From: Logan Kearsley <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (80 lines)
      From: Jim Henry <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (92 lines)
      From: R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (96 lines)
      From: Jim Henry <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (142 lines)
      From: R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Possibly the simplest possible self-segregating morphology (154 lines)
      From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>

24. Reduncancy
    • Reduncancy (35 lines)
      From: Peter Bleackley <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Reduncancy (84 lines)
      From: David Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Reduncancy (44 lines)
      From: Jim Henry <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Reduncancy (21 lines)
      From: Anthony Miles <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Reduncancy (74 lines)
      From: Maxime Papillon <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Reduncancy (42 lines)
      From: And Rosta <[log in to unmask]>

25. Teaching kids Klingon (humor)
    • Teaching kids Klingon (humor) (24 lines)
      From: Sai Emrys <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Teaching kids Klingon (humor) (33 lines)
      From: Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Teaching kids Klingon (humor) (41 lines)
      From: Richard Littauer <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Teaching kids Klingon (humor) (39 lines)
      From: Donald Boozer <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Teaching kids Klingon (humor) (52 lines)
      From: Patrick Michael Niedzielski <[log in to unmask]>

26. The 2010 Smiley Award Winner: amman iar
    • Re: The 2010 Smiley Award Winner: amman iar (52 lines)
      From: M.S. Soderquist <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: The 2010 Smiley Award Winner: amman iar (51 lines)
      From: Patrick Michael Niedzielski <[log in to unmask]>

27. Unnamed Language Phonology
    • Re: Unnamed Language Phonology (30 lines)
      From: Matthew Turnbull <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: Unnamed Language Phonology (52 lines)
      From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <[log in to unmask]>

28. USAGE: how did English initial <x> come to be /z/?
    • Re: USAGE: how did English initial <x> come to be /z/? (45 lines)
      From: Eric Christopherson <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: USAGE: how did English initial <x> come to be /z/? (94 lines)
      From: R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>
    • Re: USAGE: how did English initial <x> come to be /z/? (49 lines)
      From: Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]>