Conlang
Mailing List December 2011, 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:
9D grammar
(3 messages)
A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(14 messages)
alternative pseudoglyphs
Applying to Linguistics Grad Schools
(3 messages)
Bulyer-Lytton's Constructed Language
(4 messages)
Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(49 messages)
Con-crackpotry (was: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender))
(3 messages)
Conlang regional variations
(11 messages)
embodiment in language
(5 messages)
fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(15 messages)
Genealogical classification of conlangs (was: Euroclones)
Grammatical gender
(4 messages)
Grammatical gender (was: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it)
(5 messages)
Name That Glyph Round Two « Pseudoglyphs
Name That Glyph – Round Two « Pseudoglyphs
(6 messages)
New Blog Post: Moten Part IV
(2 messages)
New York Times article on conlangs in Hollywood
(2 messages)
No present tense?
(6 messages)
OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
(10 messages)
OT: ge ndered usa ge of "fia ncé(e)" -- plus obCo nlang voc abulary pr ompt
Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(16 messages)
The morbid topic, was: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(2 messages)
Väder/ kläd er på nors k
Väder/kläd er på nors k
(4 messages)
Vowel symbolics
(2 messages)
Vowels Control Your Brain
(8 messages)
9D grammar
Re: 9D grammar
(30 lines)
From:
neo gu <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: 9D grammar
(43 lines)
From:
Matthew Turnbull <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: 9D grammar
(55 lines)
From:
neo gu <
[log in to unmask]
>
A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(36 lines)
From:
Matthew Martin <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(57 lines)
From:
Matthew Turnbull <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(48 lines)
From:
Chris Peters <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(47 lines)
From:
neo gu <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(79 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(48 lines)
From:
Matthew Martin <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(71 lines)
From:
Matthew Turnbull <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(45 lines)
From:
David McCann <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(61 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(60 lines)
From:
Jim Henry <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(103 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(67 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(68 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
(70 lines)
From:
Logan Kearsley <
[log in to unmask]
>
alternative pseudoglyphs
alternative pseudoglyphs
(48 lines)
From:
Dale McCreery <
[log in to unmask]
>
Applying to Linguistics Grad Schools
Applying to Linguistics Grad Schools
(43 lines)
From:
George Corley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Applying to Linguistics Grad Schools
(58 lines)
From:
Sam Stutter <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Applying to Linguistics Grad Schools
(80 lines)
From:
Jen Runds <
[log in to unmask]
>
Bulyer-Lytton's Constructed Language
Bulyer-Lytton's Constructed Language
(65 lines)
From:
Andrew Higgins <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Bulyer-Lytton's Constructed Language
(52 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Bulyer-Lytton's Constructed Language
(51 lines)
From:
Fredrik Ekman <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Bulyer-Lytton's Constructed Language
(42 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(70 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(95 lines)
From:
Sam Stutter <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(81 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(39 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(50 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(143 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(147 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(36 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(61 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(84 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(101 lines)
From:
Matthew Turnbull <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(107 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(39 lines)
From:
Matthew Turnbull <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(114 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(102 lines)
From:
Sam Stutter <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(130 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(78 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(48 lines)
From:
G. van der Vegt <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(83 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(96 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(85 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(68 lines)
From:
BPJ <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(32 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(69 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(90 lines)
From:
Douglas Koller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(113 lines)
From:
BPJ <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(63 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(182 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(197 lines)
From:
Brian <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(93 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(42 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(55 lines)
From:
Sam Stutter <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(63 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(50 lines)
From:
Charlie Brickner <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(45 lines)
From:
Daniel Prohaska <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(53 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(48 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(218 lines)
From:
BPJ <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(72 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(52 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(91 lines)
From:
Brian <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(34 lines)
From:
Charlie Brickner <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(52 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(63 lines)
From:
Matthew Turnbull <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(127 lines)
From:
Jim Henry <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(146 lines)
From:
Matthew Turnbull <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(45 lines)
From:
Charlie Brickner <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(87 lines)
From:
Sai <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(39 lines)
From:
Garth Wallace <
[log in to unmask]
>
Con-crackpotry (was: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender))
Con-crackpotry (was: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender))
(70 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Con-crackpotry (was: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender))
(66 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Con-crackpotry (was: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender))
(74 lines)
From:
Matthew Turnbull <
[log in to unmask]
>
Conlang regional variations
Conlang regional variations
(43 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang regional variations
(56 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang regional variations
(66 lines)
From:
Daniel Prohaska <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang regional variations
(65 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang regional variations
(68 lines)
From:
Toms Deimonds Barvidis <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang regional variations
(50 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang regional variations
(58 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang regional variations
(63 lines)
From:
Douglas Koller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang regional variations
(65 lines)
From:
Herman Miller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang regional variations
(66 lines)
From:
Jan van Steenbergen <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Conlang regional variations
(49 lines)
From:
David McCann <
[log in to unmask]
>
embodiment in language
embodiment in language
(61 lines)
From:
Dale McCreery <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: embodiment in language
(67 lines)
From:
Sam Stutter <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: embodiment in language
(110 lines)
From:
Dale McCreery <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: embodiment in language
(35 lines)
From:
Roman Rausch <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: embodiment in language
(38 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(120 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(149 lines)
From:
Sam Stutter <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(64 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(240 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(78 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(46 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(86 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(61 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(71 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(43 lines)
From:
Charlie Brickner <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(47 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(58 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(30 lines)
From:
Charlie Brickner <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(59 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
(151 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Genealogical classification of conlangs (was: Euroclones)
Re: Genealogical classification of conlangs (was: Euroclones)
(295 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Grammatical gender
Re: Grammatical gender
(226 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Grammatical gender
(291 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Grammatical gender
(62 lines)
From:
BPJ <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Grammatical gender
(66 lines)
From:
Puey McCleary <
[log in to unmask]
>
Grammatical gender (was: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it)
Grammatical gender (was: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it)
(207 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Grammatical gender (was: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it)
(266 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Grammatical gender (was: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it)
(70 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Grammatical gender (was: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it)
(64 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Grammatical gender (was: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it)
(55 lines)
From:
BPJ <
[log in to unmask]
>
Name That Glyph Round Two « Pseudoglyphs
Re: Name That Glyph Round Two « Pseudoglyphs
(36 lines)
From:
John Erickson <
[log in to unmask]
>
Name That Glyph – Round Two « Pseudoglyphs
Name That Glyph – Round Two « Pseudoglyphs
(34 lines)
From:
A. Mendes <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Name That Glyph – Round Two « Pseudoglyphs
(56 lines)
From:
Brian <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Name That Glyph – Round Two « Pseudoglyphs
(66 lines)
From:
Galen Buttitta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Name That Glyph – Round Two « Pseudoglyphs
(101 lines)
From:
Galen Buttitta <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Name That Glyph – Round Two « Pseudoglyphs
(41 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Name That Glyph – Round Two « Pseudoglyphs
(74 lines)
From:
A. Mendes <
[log in to unmask]
>
New Blog Post: Moten Part IV
New Blog Post: Moten Part IV
(58 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New Blog Post: Moten Part IV
(78 lines)
From:
neo gu <
[log in to unmask]
>
New York Times article on conlangs in Hollywood
New York Times article on conlangs in Hollywood
(27 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: New York Times article on conlangs in Hollywood
(59 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
No present tense?
No present tense?
(48 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: No present tense?
(43 lines)
From:
Logan Kearsley <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: No present tense?
(64 lines)
From:
Larry Sulky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: No present tense?
(78 lines)
From:
Peter Cyrus <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: No present tense?
(102 lines)
From:
Larry Sulky <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: No present tense?
(54 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
(80 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
(89 lines)
From:
Matthew Turnbull <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
(41 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
(87 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
(95 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
(48 lines)
From:
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
(66 lines)
From:
Wesley Parish <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
(71 lines)
From:
BPJ <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
(113 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: OT crackpots (was: Grammatical gender)
(73 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
OT: ge ndered usa ge of "fia ncé(e)" -- plus obCo nlang voc abulary pr ompt
Re: OT: ge ndered usa ge of "fia ncé(e)" -- plus obCo nlang voc abulary pr ompt
(67 lines)
From:
Douglas Koller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(107 lines)
From:
R A Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(45 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(157 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(43 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(75 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(92 lines)
From:
Matthew Turnbull <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(92 lines)
From:
Jörg Rhiemeier <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(85 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(132 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(92 lines)
From:
Puey McCleary <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(52 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(57 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(97 lines)
From:
Sam Stutter <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(99 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(80 lines)
From:
Adam Walker <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Phaistive Fun (was: Grammatical gender)
(57 lines)
From:
Roger Mills <
[log in to unmask]
>
The morbid topic, was: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
The morbid topic, was: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(86 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: The morbid topic, was: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
(119 lines)
From:
Puey McCleary <
[log in to unmask]
>
Väder/ kläd er på nors k
Re: Väder/ kläd er på nors k
(81 lines)
From:
Even Eclectic Tolo Dybevik <
[log in to unmask]
>
Väder/kläd er på nors k
Väder/kläd er på nors k
(69 lines)
From:
Douglas Koller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Väder/kläd er på nors k
(77 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Väder/kläd er på nors k
(36 lines)
From:
Philip Newton <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Väder/kläd er på nors k
(41 lines)
From:
Charlie Brickner <
[log in to unmask]
>
Vowel symbolics
Vowel symbolics
(118 lines)
From:
A. da Mek <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vowel symbolics
(64 lines)
From:
A. da Mek <
[log in to unmask]
>
Vowels Control Your Brain
Vowels Control Your Brain
(47 lines)
From:
Lee <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
(47 lines)
From:
Koppa Dasao <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
(46 lines)
From:
Gary Shannon <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
(85 lines)
From:
Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
(37 lines)
From:
Charlie Brickner <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
(69 lines)
From:
Herman Miller <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
(46 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
(53 lines)
From:
Alex Fink <
[log in to unmask]
>
Back to the main CONLANG page
LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU