Conlang
Mailing List – August 2011, 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:
ablaut diachronics
(2 messages)
Afrihili/Akan Language Question
Away for a while
Bootstrapping conlanger community on Google+
Conlang fans vs. conworld fans (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
(5 messages)
Evolving towards Semitoid, erat: ablaut diachronics
(2 messages)
Exolanging (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
(3 messages)
Labial lateral
Labial lateral (was: the Shwa script)
(3 messages)
LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction
LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(12 messages)
Latin Motto Question.
(4 messages)
Lughnassadh
(18 messages)
Mandarin 了 (-le) (was: Perfectivity of ve rbs of being)
Natlanginess of Esperanto
(7 messages)
Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len c yan or green?)
Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len cyan or green?)
(4 messages)
Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len cyan or green?)
(3 messages)
Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is Kē len cyan or green?)
Optimum Language (was: Exolanging was: revisiting the artlang...)
OT: Re: Exolanging (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
Perfectivity of verbs of being
(29 messages)
Reverse agreement for verbs (was: reverse agreement)
(4 messages)
reversed agreement
(2 messages)
reversed agreement: a pseudohistorical approach (via Alex Fink)
(2 messages)
revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(4 messages)
THEORY: Polysynthesis without Pronominal Morphology
(4 messages)
Translation Challenge: Reading and Writing
Website Updates
Weird agreements
What to call these grammatical categories?
(7 messages)
Wikipedia Dritok article up for deletion
(3 messages)
ablaut diachronics
Re: ablaut diachronics
(67 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: ablaut diachronics
(163 lines)
From:
Basilius <
[log in to unmask]
>
Afrihili/Akan Language Question
Afrihili/Akan Language Question
(64 lines)
From:
David Peterson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Away for a while
Away for a while
(39 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Bootstrapping conlanger community on Google+
Re: Bootstrapping conlanger community on Google+
(34 lines)
From:
Sai <
[log in to unmask]
>
Conlang fans vs. conworld fans (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
Re: Conlang fans vs. conworld fans (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
(62 lines)
From:
Matthew Martin <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang fans vs. conworld fans (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
(44 lines)
From:
Sylvia Sotomayor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang fans vs. conworld fans (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
(136 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang fans vs. conworld fans (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
(61 lines)
From:
Jim Henry <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang fans vs. conworld fans (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
(111 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Evolving towards Semitoid, erat: ablaut diachronics
Evolving towards Semitoid, erat: ablaut diachronics
(185 lines)
From:
Basilius <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Evolving towards Semitoid, erat: ablaut diachronics
(242 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
Exolanging (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
Re: Exolanging (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
(216 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Exolanging (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
(75 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Exolanging (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
(83 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Labial lateral
Re: Labial lateral
(108 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Labial lateral (was: the Shwa script)
Labial lateral (was: the Shwa script)
(67 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Labial lateral (was: the Shwa script)
(76 lines)
From:
Matthew Boutilier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Labial lateral (was: the Shwa script)
(115 lines)
From:
Matthew Boutilier <
[log in to unmask]
>
LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction
Re: LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction
(45 lines)
From:
Tim Smith <
[log in to unmask]
>
LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(63 lines)
From:
Jim Henry <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(38 lines)
From:
Garth Wallace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(110 lines)
From:
BPJ <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(38 lines)
From:
Daniel Burgener <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(51 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(55 lines)
From:
Piermaria Maraziti <
[log in to unmask]
>
LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(44 lines)
From:
Charlie <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(57 lines)
From:
[log in to unmask]
Re: LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(59 lines)
From:
Jim Henry <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(42 lines)
From:
Piermaria Maraziti <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(48 lines)
From:
Garth Wallace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: LARP/RPG conlangs -- was Re: [CONLANG] revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(43 lines)
From:
Piermaria Maraziti <
[log in to unmask]
>
Latin Motto Question.
Latin Motto Question.
(56 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Latin Motto Question.
(58 lines)
From:
Charlie <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Latin Motto Question.
(97 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Latin Motto Question.
(127 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Lughnassadh
Lughnassadh
(46 lines)
From:
Toms Deimonds Barvidis <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(67 lines)
From:
Paul Bennett <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(72 lines)
From:
Toms Deimonds Barvidis <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(35 lines)
From:
Michael Everson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(63 lines)
From:
Charlie <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(33 lines)
From:
Jim Henry <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(31 lines)
From:
kechpaja <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(41 lines)
From:
Patrick Dunn <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(44 lines)
From:
Peter Bleackley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(52 lines)
From:
Jim Henry <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(115 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(45 lines)
From:
Charlie <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(52 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(43 lines)
From:
Jim Henry <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(78 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(72 lines)
From:
Sam Stutter <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(62 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Lughnassadh
(125 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Mandarin 了 (-le) (was: Perfectivity of ve rbs of being)
Mandarin 了 (-le) (was: Perfectivity of ve rbs of being)
(181 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Natlanginess of Esperanto
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto
(64 lines)
From:
BPJ <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto
(62 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto
(78 lines)
From:
Michael Wettstein <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto
(49 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto
(57 lines)
From:
Jim Henry <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto
(50 lines)
From:
BPJ <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto
(43 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len c yan or green?)
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len c yan or green?)
(107 lines)
From:
Peter Cyrus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len cyan or green?)
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len cyan or green?)
(100 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len cyan or green?)
(72 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len cyan or green?)
(60 lines)
From:
neo gu <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len cyan or green?)
(92 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len cyan or green?)
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len cyan or green?)
(57 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len cyan or green?)
(116 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is KÄ “ len cyan or green?)
(45 lines)
From:
Jim Henry <
[log in to unmask]
>
Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is Kē len cyan or green?)
Re: Natlanginess of Esperanto (was: Is Kē len cyan or green?)
(54 lines)
From:
Jim Henry <
[log in to unmask]
>
Optimum Language (was: Exolanging was: revisiting the artlang...)
Re: Optimum Language (was: Exolanging was: revisiting the artlang...)
(47 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: Re: Exolanging (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
OT: Re: Exolanging (was: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction)
(40 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
Perfectivity of verbs of being
Perfectivity of verbs of being
(68 lines)
From:
Matthew Boutilier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(81 lines)
From:
Matthew Boutilier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(39 lines)
From:
Roman Rausch <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(97 lines)
From:
Matthew Boutilier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(95 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(82 lines)
From:
Veoler <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(46 lines)
From:
David McCann <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(55 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(223 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(39 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(62 lines)
From:
Nico Baier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(64 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(102 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(36 lines)
From:
Michael Everson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(100 lines)
From:
Nico Baier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(96 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(86 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(46 lines)
From:
Wm Annis <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(134 lines)
From:
Basilius <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(107 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(43 lines)
From:
Wm Annis <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(64 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(77 lines)
From:
Peter Cyrus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(142 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(40 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(52 lines)
From:
Vasiliy Chernov <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(72 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(110 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Perfectivity of verbs of being
(50 lines)
From:
Logan Kearsley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Reverse agreement for verbs (was: reverse agreement)
Reverse agreement for verbs (was: reverse agreement)
(81 lines)
From:
Nikolay Ivankov <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Reverse agreement for verbs (was: reverse agreement)
(100 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Reverse agreement for verbs (was: reverse agreement)
(138 lines)
From:
Nikolay Ivankov <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Reverse agreement for verbs (was: reverse agreement)
(94 lines)
From:
Garth Wallace <
[log in to unmask]
>
reversed agreement
Re: reversed agreement
(54 lines)
From:
Nikolay Ivankov <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: reversed agreement
(32 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
reversed agreement: a pseudohistorical approach (via Alex Fink)
Re: reversed agreement: a pseudohistorical approach (via Alex Fink)
(56 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: reversed agreement: a pseudohistorical approach (via Alex Fink)
(102 lines)
From:
Nikolay Ivankov <
[log in to unmask]
>
revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
Re: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(57 lines)
From:
BPJ <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(194 lines)
From:
And Rosta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(240 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: revisiting the artlang/engelang distinction (was: Re: van Steenbergen Hexagon
(100 lines)
From:
David Peterson <
[log in to unmask]
>
THEORY: Polysynthesis without Pronominal Morphology
THEORY: Polysynthesis without Pronominal Morphology
(52 lines)
From:
Nico Baier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Polysynthesis without Pronominal Morphology
(79 lines)
From:
Basilius <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Polysynthesis without Pronominal Morphology
(38 lines)
From:
Wm Annis <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: THEORY: Polysynthesis without Pronominal Morphology
(47 lines)
From:
taliesin the storyteller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Translation Challenge: Reading and Writing
Re: Translation Challenge: Reading and Writing
(68 lines)
From:
Charlie <
[log in to unmask]
>
Website Updates
Website Updates
(38 lines)
From:
Sylvia Sotomayor <
[log in to unmask]
>
Weird agreements
Weird agreements
(50 lines)
From:
Nikolay Ivankov <
[log in to unmask]
>
What to call these grammatical categories?
What to call these grammatical categories?
(50 lines)
From:
Jesse Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: What to call these grammatical categories?
(61 lines)
From:
neo gu <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: What to call these grammatical categories?
(45 lines)
From:
Paul Bennett <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: What to call these grammatical categories?
(99 lines)
From:
Douglas Koller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: What to call these grammatical categories?
(83 lines)
From:
Jesse Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: What to call these grammatical categories?
(32 lines)
From:
Garth Wallace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: What to call these grammatical categories?
(70 lines)
From:
Jesse Bangs <
[log in to unmask]
>
Wikipedia Dritok article up for deletion
Wikipedia Dritok article up for deletion
(24 lines)
From:
Sai <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Wikipedia Dritok article up for deletion
(104 lines)
From:
Lee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Wikipedia Dritok article up for deletion
(84 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Back to the main CONLANG page
LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU
![[Conlang Flag]](http://www.theiling.de/00/conflag_25gif.gif){kind=small}
Conlang Mailing List – August 2011, week 1
Conlang Mailing List – August 2011, week 1
