LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for AUXLANG Archives


AUXLANG Archives

AUXLANG Archives


AUXLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

AUXLANG Home

AUXLANG Home

AUXLANG  May 1999, Week 3

AUXLANG May 1999, Week 3

Subject:

Re: AUXLANG Digest - 12 May 1999 to 13 May 1999

From:

Bob LeChevalier-Logical Language Group <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

International Auxiliary Languages <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 14 May 1999 07:41:06 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (654 lines)

At 12:01 AM 5/14/99 -0400, you wrote:
>There are 18 messages totalling 1099 lines in this issue.
 
Mostly a reply to Petry, it gets hard to edit when the points I want to
respond to are in separate messages.
 
>From:    Robin Turner <[log in to unmask]>
>la kris.burd. cusku di'e
>> Digression on immediate recognisability: Suppose that, as a matter
>> of actual fact, the world is set up in such a way that an imm. rec.
>> language like Interlingua or Occidental can carve out a useful
>> role for itself as a means of international communication, while
>> the likes of Esperanto and Lojban, by virtue of what I'll call
>> their natural self-enclosure, are destined to continue more or
>> less as they are now. Under such conditions, wouldn't it be
>> worthwhile for some people to pursue these imm. rec. projects? And,
>> since we don't actually know in what way the world is set up, isn't
>> it in fact worthwhile for some people to pursue them even now,
 
>> especially since (like Esperanto, like Lojban) they offer their
>> users genuine compensations even now (largely different ones than
>> Esperanto, than Lojban)?
 
I have no objection to anyone pursuing any project they choose for any
reason.  Their individual reasons will determine how worthwhile it is.
 
>Yes.  One reason why I'm less critical than some people of "hobbyists" is
that
>they preserve and develop languages that may later turn out to fit "the
way the
>world is set up" better.  Personally I'm very sceptical about the whole
"at-sight
>readability" thing (for reasons which I'ver explained at great - and possibly
>boring - length already) but if people are prepared to look into it, and
>promote/develop languags which are designed to be at-sight readable, then
fine.
>What I object to are the exagerrated claims made by some people on this
subject.
 
And the forum on which they are made.  This forum is either a group of
friends sharing a common interest, or a group of intellectuals sharing an
intellectual endeavor.  Neither friends nor intellectuals appreciate being
the recipient of marketing hype (or even the style of marketing hype) from
fellow friends or from fellow intellectuals.  It violates the Gricean
pragmatic maxims for the conversation.  It is rude.  It is not friendly,
nor is it intellectual.
 
And then:
 
>From:    maf <[log in to unmask]>
>Yes, so often when I read Bob's old Kosmo quotes I think they would have been
>much better off not writing _anything_ about _any_ other IAL. Oh well,
live and
>don't learn ....
 
The knocking of other languages, whether for  "partisanship" or for
"marketing advantage" alienates the supporters of those languages.  For
every person won over by such arguments, hundreds will be offended to the
point that they will never consider the alternative, and a number at least
equal to the converts will be inspired into bad-mouthing the badmouthers.
We have SEEN this in the history.  That is the ONLY useful lesson to learn
from reading the old hashings-out.
 
 
Friends might value the appraisals of other friends, but a long-dead
convert to another cause who badmouths your cause is not a friend.
Intellectuals, on the other hand, respond to rational argument and not
testimonials.  I am not sure WHO would respond favorably to a long-dead
ex-Esperantist badmouthing Esperanto.
 
>From:    "Robert J. Petry" <[log in to unmask]>
>maf wrote:
>That's right, some don't learn, and it ain't me. I've learned a lot on
this list over
>the past two years, plu or minus, and what I've learned is very very
interesting.
>Part being, most of the, as you mentioned above in the kut, statements and
>conclusions "consensusfied" today are in total error from what the
originals said.
 
I know of no conclusion that is "consensified" about Occidental other than
that if there were thousands or millions of supporters back then, they
abandoned their "cause", and were thus not all that committed to it.  There
appears to have been a trend to go over to Interlingua among such
abandoners, but I have heard of no serious scientific study.  That is not
consensus, but rather lack of information and generally a lack of desire to
dig further.
 
>And, what I love is this. This list keeps telling me it ain't so, it won't
grow, it's
>dead, etc.
 
The "list" has told you no such thing.  Individuals have told you that they
believe Occidental is dead, not because there aren't necessarily a few
adherents scatteredf around the world, but because we see no reason to
think that something that failed to thrive once has a more fertile ground
in which to operate now.
 
>From:    "Robert J. Petry" <[log in to unmask]>
 
>> I can certainly read Occidental!  Didn't you know?  Haven't I made this
>> clear?  I can't read it quite as well as English, French, German,
>> Esperanto, Interlingua or Spanish, but about as well as I can read Italian
>> or Portuguese, neither of which I've ever studied.
>
>Well, so can millions of others! And, that is the beginning point! You
_cannot_
>do that with Esperanto,
 
I can pick out many roots in Esperanto text, many roots in Occidental text.
 Sometimes by stringing roots together I can get some idea what the person
might be saying, usually based on prior context (I would not expect Petry
to compliment Esperanto or criticize Occidental, and therefore will reject
an interpreatation that might seem to do either).  But I do not think I am
"reading" this because I do not fully comprehend.  And at my level of
observation, I see no EFFECTIVE difference between Esperanto and Occidental
in such supposed at-sight readability, even though I EXPECT more
readability from Occidental given the claims of its supporters and what I
know about the respective language claims.  Now a systematic test might
show that I could pick out 50% more words in Accidental than in Esperanto
text, but that turns out not to be all that much more useful - it helps not
at all with the words that I cannot pick out.
 
Based on the language design, I would expect Interlingua to have
approximately as many recognizable roots as Occidental, but as well to be
no more "readable" to an untrained English speaker than the other two.
 
>And, you reading Occ without training, and me
>and others not being able to read Esperanto without training is all the
answer
>needed.
 
No it isn't because I cannot read either without training.  And I am not
interested in getting the training because of the style of
argument/teaching used by the trainer.
 
>So, I can reach you with Occidental and you can't reach me with
>Esperanto, your favorite, unless I study it.
 
So you claim to understand NO Esperanto text "at-sight" and all Occidental
texts "at-sight".
 
>Occidental does what Esperanto cannot and never will be able to do, period.
 
Maybe for you.
 
>And, the evidence is everywhere in the IAL field, and more
>and more being shown in the public field. Occ is an INTER national
language. None
>of the others on the table at the moment are.
 
You make a comparison with Esperanto here, but it is not Esperanto that
claims at-sight-readability in the way you do. Interlingua might make such
a claim.  Do you similarly claim not to be able to read any Interlingua text?
 
 
I can shoot at Occidental for not having the features that Lojban has and
Occidental does not.  But I will not claim that Lojban is guaranteed
success and Occidental is guaranteed failure by this fact.  You seem to be
doing this with Esperanto.  It simply fails to convince.
 
>Occidental is the INTER language, Interlingua is a "semi" INTER language
[and the
>easier examples of ILa that come close to this are over 90% Occidental],
 
or maybe Accidental is 90% Interlingua.
 
>> This is again your argument that everyone can read Occidental at first
>> sight.  But Occidental has basically the same strengths and weaknesses as
>> Interlingua, except that Interlingua's vocabulary is chosen by formula and
>> Occidental's by the author's gut instinct.  Actually I favor more
>> regularity and fewere exceptions (or if you prefer, fewer rules &
>> sub-rules) than either one has.  Therefore, I prefer a language like
>> Esperanto (or Ido) to Occidental.
>
>This whole statement is an assumption.
 
I see several statements there, none of which seem assumptive in nature.
Most seem like opinions, and one reflects reported claims about how the
words of each langauge were selected.  Those claims may or may not be true.
 
>First, I did not say anywhere "everyone"
>can read Occidental. I said multiple millions can, and this CANNOT be done
with
>Esperanto with even the greatest stretch of Esperanto arguments.
 
Where in the above paragraph did HE refer to Esperanto or claim that
Esperanto had the same strengths as Oxidental (this is fun - the first was
an axidental typo, and now I am tempted to see how many ways I can misspell
the language name and still have it plausibly pronounced the same - ah
well, I will continue that some other time).
 
 
He made a comparison between Interlingua and Occidental on at-sight
readability.  You keep trying to say he is comparing with Esperanto.  This
says little for your Engish at-sight reading capability.
 
>You are incorrect about how the vocabulary was chosen. And, Occidental is
more
>regular than ILa. And, the word's were not chosen by "gut instinct". This
is a
>baloney argument to support a preference and is based on no facts whatsoever.
>If you truly mean you favor more regularity and fewer exceptions, then you
will
>drop Esp. today, and take up Occidental. This is an old rehashed argument
>disproven over and over again.
 
It is not "disproven", because Ken is not convinced by the supposed disproof.
 
>And, what fewer rules? All the needed rules for
>Occ can be printed on a postcard, and they are fewer than Esp. 's 16.
 
The attempt to reduce a conlang to 16 rules are fewer is a silly game.  I
also did a comparison with Esperanto showing that Lojban could describe in
11 rules what Esperanto describes in 16.  But my argument was not to say
that Lojban is easier to learn, but that the rule count claims were
complete garbage.
 
If all the rules for Occidental can be printed on a postcard, then I expect
a computer parser and word-analyzer that will NEVER make a mistake and will
process all of your rules and will substantially process all of the
language using only root/word lists as data.  If it is as simple as you
say, you should have this for me by next week, because somewhere in your
burgeoning supporters on the computer savvy internet will be someone who
knows the programming.
 
>Esperanto
>is an illusion of simplicity over Occidental. And, since you prefer
Esperanto, or
>Ido, why don't you post with it here? And, I'll post only in Occidental. That
>would be a good test of readibility, regularity, etc.
 
That would be a test of at sight readability, not of regularity.  The test
of regularity will be to look at a list of rules and see how long in takes
to find an exception that breaks a rule.  I managed 5 seconds with one of
your Occidental rules below.
 
 
>And, the folks being tested have to be
>from the general public. For, they ultimately are the ones to make the final
>decision on using an IAL or not, right?
 
Not hardly.  Such decisions will be made by the educated elite with
political power to gain formal recognition and the direction of corporate
and governmental financial resources to the promotion of the cause.
> Unless we want to "force" an IAL on them.
 
You would instead "hype" it on them.  In my opinion, this is just as bad.
 
>> Esperanto puts the power of two-way communication into the hands of
>> everyone, even beginners.  "Naturalistic" planlingvoj give the ability to
>> read to the favored ones, the speakers of the chosen source languages, but
>> even they must work harder at two-way communication than is the case with
>> Esperanto.  Shall we collaborate on designing a test?
>
>Yes, of course. I mentioned it above.
 
Your test is invalid.  Ken mentioned favored speakers.  His test would
require testing with only people who are not speakers of European
languages.  Tell me how many Chinese Occidentalists there are, and how
rapidly you are spreading in THAT market.
 
>ILa's vocabulary is more localized in that it is an attempt at mimicing
>sud-romanic lingues. And, this does limit ILa's overall at sight readibility.
 
No, it enhances it for some and reduces it for others.  If the market is
somewhat familiar with the source languages, it will appear more recognizable.
 
>> No, the fact is that although Occidental had its day in the sun, it failed
>> to grip.  There's some great experimental and experiential evidence for
>> you!  There may be a wide variety of reasons for that fact, but it does
>> seem unlikely to change.
>
>This is nonsense, Ken. It was only placed before IAListes, a very limited
field.
>It has never been put before the public's eyes.
 
In 1880 there were few IAListes.  Esperanto was marketed *primarily* to the
public.  You are claiming that even in its heydey, NO ONE attempted to do
with Occidental what was doen rather trivially with Esperanto by simply
publishing a book?
 
For that matter, were any books on Occidental published in any natlang?  If
so, then you are wrong.  If they had been marketing to the IAListes, they
would have published in Esperanto or some other IAL.
 
 
>It is now, and that is why it is growing.
 
EVERY other conlang with Internet support is growing.  Lojban is growing,
probably as fast as Occidental, and we are doing so without hype, and only
by word of mouth.
 
>You are mirroring Volapu"k kinds of arguments about Esperanto when it
>first appeared. And, this is the old hackneyed argument with no basis in
fact. It
>is a mere wish that Occidental failed.
 
It did fail.  You may revive it just as the Volapukists may revive their
effort.  but it failed nonetheless.
 
 
>Easy, I switch to other international
>words until I find the ones you are most familiar with,
 
I guarantee that if you tried this with me on the street, I would be
equally baffled by any of the choices.  I cannot even understand ENGLISH
when spoken by someone with a bad accent, and you want me to recognize
"international" roots mangled in non-English ways spoken by a foreigner.
 
>and I slow down because English
>speakers don't understand how to speak rapidly like the Italianos,
Mexicanos, and other
>beautiful languages.
 
Ah, someone who feels a language must be spoken rapidly to be beautiful.
Maybe this is part of the aesthetic issue.  Other than poetry, I prefer
someone speaking slowly and clearly when they are trying to communciate.
Speed is not beautiful to me.
 
>From that basis, we begin to communicate. Now, if I get the basic
>information I need, I go on and thank the individual. If, on the other
hand, that
>individual finds that it was very useful to be able to understand me, and
he/she wants
>to do the same, I can teach him/her about Occidental right there & show
them the simple
>rules they need to know. For example:
 
>
>Sr. un parole con -t es li passate. Por exemple, in anglesi li passate es
representat >por -d o -ed soven.
 
Well you are either talking about past tense or passive voice, I think.  Of
course, this presumes that the target language even has these concepts.
Russian has two past tenses and a variety of passives.
 
>In addir, "li" es articul definit.
>"un" li articul indefinit.
 
I understood that.  But what do you do if the people in the target language
do not use articles at all (Russian again), much less distinguish between
definite and indefinite.  (No idea whether Estonian does.  Maybe Robin can
talk about how someone Turkish would respond to this lesson.)
 
>Now, with very little effort, unless you can't understand "futur"
"passate" "presente"
 
In context of each other, I do, but "passive" was my first assumption for
"passate", and you must admit would give a decidedly different flavor to
understanding what you wrote.
 
>then you now have most of what you need to understand Occidental, and I
have shown it to
>you in Occidental.
 
Except that I will forget it by tomorrow, at which point I will be as much
in the dark as I am today.
 
> You won't find exceptions to the above in Occidental so there are no
>curves to watch out for.
 
Har har.  Just watch me.
 
>Now, with very little effort anyone can begin right now writing, speaking
and using
>Occidental. Now, many vocabulary works are already known by you in
Occidental.
 
zero.
 
>So, how do you find them?
>
>Start with a simple exercise. Think of the words you know that end in
-tion or -ion.
 
First one that came to mind.  "nation".  Sorry 'bout that.
 
 
>speculation for example. How do we find the verb in Occidental?
 
assuming we want to (the concept that words get converted between nouns and
verbs by playing with endings is already a bias not widespread in English,
which prefers to verb nouns rather than to add endings).
 
>Simple. The suffix in Occidental is -tion. So, remove it.
 
I play along
 
na-
 
>That leaves specula. Now, all verbs in Occidental do not end in ar, er,
ir. They end in
>-r.
>
>So, add the -r to specular, and now you have the Occidental verb.
 
nar.
 
Now, what does it mean, oh guru of complete and utter regularity.
 
>Then, by using the
>word, you will find out if it is inter-national enough or not.
 
Oh great - another (albeit the same root)
 
"internar" must be "to make international", right?
 
Of course it also looks like it might mean "to put inside" based on at
sight recognizability rather than hokum rules.
 
Your claim is broken practically before I started.
 
>Now, if you have another word like:
>nomination, remove the -tion, leaves nomina, add -r and you get nominar.
 
Which means what?  To nominate?  i.e. to recommend for a position?
 
Or based on Latinate roots, does it means "to name"
 
(all this assumes that the infinitive is the most important form of the
verb or that there is no other form.  In English, neither is true.  In
Russian, the former is true.
 
>introduction. Now this is a different rule.
 
Or rather it is an exception. BTW, why remove "tion" and not "ion"?
 
>Adplu, vu posse da un command in Occidental in tis maniere.
 
I see no verb, since nothing ends with 'r'.  You are saying to Adplu that
"you are the posse of a command in Occidental in this hand".
 
So much for at-sight readability.
 
>Li verbe es "responder". Por li command it es necessi usar "Ples" con li
verbe. Por
>exemple: Ples responder!
 
To make a command, you say "Please".  How polite %^)
 
>E it es possibil dar un comman in tis maniere. responder - -r = responde.
Alor, in tis
>maniere di: "Responde! Responde!".
>
>Now, frankly, you know more than you need to know to now use Occidental
actively,
 
har har har.
 
>beginning right now. Why? Because you already know all the words you need
to begin using
 
>Occidental. What you didn't know before was how to add the endings of
Occidental.
 
And I still don't.  Because in the two lines of yours immediately above, I
see not a single instance of a word or concept to which I can apply any of
your rules.  No commands, no infinitives, no -ly adverbs, no -ed pasts or
passives, no futures, no -tion words.
 
>Of course, there is more to learn.
 
Understatement of the century.
 
>But, now you are an Occidentalist.
 
[Guffaw!]
 
>How much simpler can you get?
 
With Lojban, to make a noun into a verb (or predicate, in our case), you
simply just leave it alone (but do not include any article).  To make an
adverb, leave it alone, but put it before another such word. To make a
command, use "ko" as the subject, as the imperative subject meaning "you".
You needn't specify past, present, or future, unless context makes it
unclear, in which case you can optionally mark tense by preceding with pu,
ca, and ba respectively (unless you want to refer to an "event"
perfectively, in which case it is pu'o, ca'o, and ba'o).
 
No exceptions at all, no additional rules for these constructs.  All
content words in the language are equally nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs
depending on position and existence of an article.  The verbal sense of a
noun, by the way, is the one which comes from putting something the noun
describes in the subject.  Thus the Lojban verb equivalent of "to arm a
man" is to be an upper limb of a person, which "birka" means.  ko birka
means I am commanding you to be an upper limb of a person.  ba'o birka is
the aftermath of being an arm of a person (maybe it was cut off).
 
Now Lojban has very few at-sight-readable roots, but the rules are so much
simpler as to make up for it, and you need not worry at all about parts of
speech, since they are all one, or endings, because they are none (and
hence need no changing because the root ends in the wrong letter).
 
See. I can play the game too.  Except that Lojban *really* has no exceptions.
 
>And, with what I've just shown you, within a weekend you can become fluent
>in Occidental! Do that with Esp. Please, be my guest.
 
You can do it with Lojban too, as you can see.  Just learn enough roots,
and you'll be fluent in a week.  This is what I would have to do with
Occidental, since I cannot apply the Occidental rules to just any English
words. mi non caner apper li Occidental ruli juster any Anglesi wordi.
(Did that make perfect sense.  After all, I used the verb "can", dropped
the 'ly' ending of "apply", and used "to just" as an infinitive like a good
naive follower of rules that have NO exceptions.
 
>> The most appropriate IAL is not simply a question of who can read the
most without
>> bothering to learn anything.
>
>And, as I just showed you, now you can not only read it, you can begin
writing it and
>speaking it with the vocabulary you already have.
 
Thoroughly disproven, unless everything I did according to your rules
actually meant what   the English meant.
 
>And, with some simple experience, you
 
>can learn to hone it to your desires. Esque  it grand? And, it didn't
take you even
>twenty minutes to learn the above. And, there is not misunderstanding in the
>communication given.
 
ROTFLMAO
(what is that in Occidental?  In Lojban it is "za'ocai", probably with a
.ionai (disrespect) thrown in before it in this case.)
 
>> Criticising Esperanto on grounds that no proponents of Esperanto have
_ver_ claimed
>> (AFIK) is a cheap shot (like criticising Occi or IALA for not being
culturally
>> neutral).
>
>Cheap shot? When is the truth a cheap shot? And, is it a cheap shot to say
Esperanto is
>not an INTER language?
 
It is a cheap shot to define (or redefine) "INTER language" so as to
include your language and exclude Esperanto, especially when the criteria
you are using break down as easily as I just broke them down.
 
>Of course not, for they will even admit they are not. That wasn't
>a cheap shot, that was just presenting the strong point of Occidental with
an example
>everyone can see and understand.
 
To which I have presented the weak point (that this "strong point" doesn't
work) with examples that everyone can see and understand.
 
>Even Esperantists have admitted, without fear, that they
>aren't "at sight" like Occ. and other things. There was no cheap shot at
all. I didn't
>hit below the belt, like a fighter in the ring, I hit head on with a
"legal" point.
 
It is "illegal" to in an argument to coin words like "INTER language" with
meanings that are merely marketing hype.
 
>From:    Ken Caviness <[log in to unmask]>
>>Cheap shot? When is the truth a cheap shot? And, is it a cheap shot to say
>Esperanto is
>>not an INTER language? Of course not, for they will even admit they are=
> not.
>
>In a previous message in this thread, I said that we needed a clearer
>definition of this idea of an "Inter-language".
 
Ken, we agree entirely.
 
>According to one
>alternative I suggested, even Occidental is _not_ one!  According to
>another possible definition, Esperanto and Ido and Interlingua and
 
>Occidental and Novial and ... are _all_ "Inter-languages".
 
And maybe Lojban?  %^)
 
>From:    "Robert J. Petry" <[log in to unmask]>
>I can't help it if your mind can't see the light when it is placed in
front of it.
 
And we can't help it if you are an arrogant malvecnu (mal makes a Lojban
word into a derogative, and you need not know any more).
 
>But, the difference is going to knock you over when it finally hits you
what is
>meant. It is something you will easily self-discover if you keep looking. The
>problem is, partly, that we use our own preconcieved idea of what
"international"
>is. But, "inter-national" now, that is something else! Whoa, when it hits
you,
>wow, I'm going to like hearing your response then.
 
Why should they mean anything different.  I mean we are talking
at-sight-readability of  international roots that have clear and precise
meanings, aren't we?
 
>Cordialmen,
 
BTW, I meant to ask when you explained this.  Does this mean that you are
speaking in the manner of an after-dinner-drink?
 
>Example:
>"Bob, Occidental is stupid for using l', n', t'."
>Opposite: Sorry folks, those were dropped long ago.
 
Oh, so the name of the language is now Occidea?
 
>"Bob, Cosmoglotta flopped, is dead."
>Opposite: Sorry folks, I have the current issue.
 
Latin is a dead language, but a lot of priests speak it in Catholic
services.  It remains just as dead.
 
>"Bob, don't you know Occidental is dead as a doornail, why try to revive it?"
>Opposite: "Sorry there are representatives and adherentes in 15 contries,
right
>now".
 
Lojban has more like 30.  Are we ahead in the race?
 
>"Bob, the public can't read Occidental, because I, a proponent of xxx IAL
can't
>read it."
>Opposite: "Oh my g-d, look at this, I can read it.
 
Oh my gawd, look at this, I can mangle it.
 
>this is amazing!"
 
You are amazing.  Make that mal-amazing, to semi-Lojbanize it.
 
>I could give more examples, but hey, you've all read them already.
 
"mi coud give more exampi, bu hey vu've a read hem aready".
 
Great Occidental (oops Occidea, since I took out the n's, t's, and l's that
it doesn't use)
 
>Just think, Occidental is growing as we speak.
 
Like a cancer or a wart?
 
lojbab
----
lojbab                     ***NOTE NEW ADDRESS***           [log in to unmask]
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA               703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban:
  see Lojban WWW Server: href=" http://xiron.pc.helsinki.fi/lojban/ "
  Order _The Complete Lojban Language_ - see our Web pages or ask me.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2019, Week 3
November 2019, Week 2
November 2019, Week 1
October 2019, Week 4
October 2019, Week 3
October 2019, Week 2
October 2019, Week 1
September 2019, Week 4
September 2019, Week 3
September 2019, Week 2
September 2019, Week 1
August 2019, Week 5
August 2019, Week 4
August 2019, Week 3
August 2019, Week 2
July 2019, Week 3
July 2019, Week 2
July 2019, Week 1
June 2019, Week 4
June 2019, Week 3
June 2019, Week 1
May 2019, Week 1
April 2019, Week 4
April 2019, Week 3
March 2019, Week 5
March 2019, Week 4
February 2019, Week 3
February 2019, Week 1
January 2019, Week 5
January 2019, Week 2
October 2018, Week 2
October 2018, Week 1
September 2018, Week 3
September 2018, Week 2
August 2018, Week 5
August 2018, Week 4
August 2018, Week 3
August 2018, Week 2
July 2018, Week 4
July 2018, Week 1
June 2018, Week 4
June 2018, Week 3
June 2018, Week 2
June 2018, Week 1
May 2018, Week 3
April 2018, Week 4
April 2018, Week 3
April 2018, Week 2
March 2018, Week 4
February 2018, Week 3
February 2018, Week 1
January 2018, Week 4
January 2018, Week 3
January 2018, Week 1
December 2017, Week 5
December 2017, Week 4
December 2017, Week 2
November 2017, Week 3
November 2017, Week 2
November 2017, Week 1
October 2017, Week 5
October 2017, Week 4
October 2017, Week 3
October 2017, Week 1
September 2017, Week 5
August 2017, Week 5
August 2017, Week 4
August 2017, Week 3
August 2017, Week 2
August 2017, Week 1
July 2017, Week 4
July 2017, Week 2
July 2017, Week 1
June 2017, Week 3
June 2017, Week 1
May 2017, Week 5
May 2017, Week 4
May 2017, Week 3
May 2017, Week 2
May 2017, Week 1
April 2017, Week 4
April 2017, Week 3
April 2017, Week 2
April 2017, Week 1
March 2017, Week 4
March 2017, Week 3
March 2017, Week 2
March 2017, Week 1
February 2017, Week 4
February 2017, Week 3
February 2017, Week 2
February 2017, Week 1
January 2017, Week 5
January 2017, Week 4
January 2017, Week 3
January 2017, Week 2
January 2017, Week 1
December 2016, Week 5
December 2016, Week 4
December 2016, Week 3
December 2016, Week 2
December 2016, Week 1
November 2016, Week 5
November 2016, Week 4
November 2016, Week 3
November 2016, Week 2
November 2016, Week 1
October 2016, Week 5
October 2016, Week 3
October 2016, Week 2
October 2016, Week 1
September 2016, Week 3
September 2016, Week 2
September 2016, Week 1
August 2016, Week 3
August 2016, Week 2
August 2016, Week 1
July 2016, Week 5
July 2016, Week 4
July 2016, Week 3
July 2016, Week 2
July 2016, Week 1
June 2016, Week 5
June 2016, Week 4
June 2016, Week 3
June 2016, Week 2
June 2016, Week 1
May 2016, Week 5
May 2016, Week 4
May 2016, Week 3
May 2016, Week 2
May 2016, Week 1
April 2016, Week 5
April 2016, Week 4
April 2016, Week 3
April 2016, Week 2
April 2016, Week 1
March 2016, Week 5
March 2016, Week 3
March 2016, Week 2
March 2016, Week 1
February 2016, Week 5
February 2016, Week 4
February 2016, Week 3
February 2016, Week 2
February 2016, Week 1
January 2016, Week 5
January 2016, Week 4
January 2016, Week 3
January 2016, Week 2
January 2016, Week 1
December 2015, Week 5
December 2015, Week 4
December 2015, Week 3
December 2015, Week 2
December 2015, Week 1
November 2015, Week 4
November 2015, Week 3
November 2015, Week 2
November 2015, Week 1
October 2015, Week 5
October 2015, Week 4
October 2015, Week 3
October 2015, Week 2
September 2015, Week 4
September 2015, Week 2
September 2015, Week 1
August 2015, Week 5
August 2015, Week 4
August 2015, Week 3
August 2015, Week 2
August 2015, Week 1
July 2015, Week 4
July 2015, Week 3
July 2015, Week 2
July 2015, Week 1
June 2015, Week 5
June 2015, Week 4
June 2015, Week 3
June 2015, Week 2
June 2015, Week 1
May 2015, Week 5
May 2015, Week 3
May 2015, Week 2
May 2015, Week 1
April 2015, Week 5
April 2015, Week 4
April 2015, Week 3
April 2015, Week 2
April 2015, Week 1
March 2015, Week 5
March 2015, Week 4
March 2015, Week 3
March 2015, Week 2
March 2015, Week 1
February 2015, Week 3
February 2015, Week 2
February 2015, Week 1
January 2015, Week 5
January 2015, Week 4
January 2015, Week 3
January 2015, Week 2
January 2015, Week 1
December 2014, Week 5
December 2014, Week 4
December 2014, Week 3
December 2014, Week 2
December 2014, Week 1
November 2014, Week 5
November 2014, Week 4
November 2014, Week 3
November 2014, Week 2
November 2014, Week 1
October 2014, Week 5
October 2014, Week 4
October 2014, Week 3
October 2014, Week 2
October 2014, Week 1
September 2014, Week 5
September 2014, Week 4
September 2014, Week 3
September 2014, Week 2
August 2014, Week 5
August 2014, Week 4
August 2014, Week 3
August 2014, Week 2
August 2014, Week 1
July 2014, Week 5
July 2014, Week 4
July 2014, Week 3
July 2014, Week 2
July 2014, Week 1
June 2014, Week 5
June 2014, Week 4
June 2014, Week 3
June 2014, Week 2
June 2014, Week 1
May 2014, Week 5
May 2014, Week 4
May 2014, Week 2
May 2014, Week 1
April 2014, Week 4
April 2014, Week 3
April 2014, Week 2
April 2014, Week 1
March 2014, Week 4
March 2014, Week 3
March 2014, Week 2
March 2014, Week 1
February 2014, Week 4
February 2014, Week 3
February 2014, Week 2
February 2014, Week 1
January 2014, Week 5
January 2014, Week 4
January 2014, Week 3
January 2014, Week 1
December 2013, Week 5
December 2013, Week 4
December 2013, Week 3
December 2013, Week 2
December 2013, Week 1
November 2013, Week 5
November 2013, Week 4
November 2013, Week 3
November 2013, Week 2
November 2013, Week 1
October 2013, Week 5
October 2013, Week 4
October 2013, Week 3
October 2013, Week 2
October 2013, Week 1
September 2013, Week 3
August 2013, Week 4
August 2013, Week 3
August 2013, Week 2
July 2013, Week 2
July 2013, Week 1
June 2013, Week 5
June 2013, Week 4
June 2013, Week 3
June 2013, Week 2
May 2013, Week 5
May 2013, Week 3
May 2013, Week 2
May 2013, Week 1
April 2013, Week 5
April 2013, Week 4
April 2013, Week 3
April 2013, Week 2
April 2013, Week 1
March 2013, Week 5
March 2013, Week 4
March 2013, Week 3
March 2013, Week 2
March 2013, Week 1
February 2013, Week 4
February 2013, Week 3
February 2013, Week 2
February 2013, Week 1
January 2013, Week 4
January 2013, Week 3
January 2013, Week 2
January 2013, Week 1
December 2012, Week 5
December 2012, Week 4
December 2012, Week 3
December 2012, Week 2
December 2012, Week 1
November 2012, Week 4
November 2012, Week 3
November 2012, Week 2
November 2012, Week 1
October 2012, Week 5
October 2012, Week 4
October 2012, Week 3
October 2012, Week 2
October 2012, Week 1
September 2012, Week 5
September 2012, Week 4
September 2012, Week 3
September 2012, Week 2
September 2012, Week 1
August 2012, Week 4
August 2012, Week 2
August 2012, Week 1
July 2012, Week 5
July 2012, Week 4
July 2012, Week 3
July 2012, Week 2
July 2012, Week 1
June 2012, Week 5
June 2012, Week 4
June 2012, Week 3
June 2012, Week 1
May 2012, Week 5
May 2012, Week 4
May 2012, Week 3
May 2012, Week 2
May 2012, Week 1
April 2012, Week 4
April 2012, Week 3
April 2012, Week 2
April 2012, Week 1
March 2012, Week 5
March 2012, Week 4
March 2012, Week 3
March 2012, Week 2
March 2012, Week 1
February 2012, Week 5
February 2012, Week 4
February 2012, Week 3
February 2012, Week 2
February 2012, Week 1
January 2012, Week 4
December 2011, Week 5
December 2011, Week 4
December 2011, Week 3
December 2011, Week 2
December 2011, Week 1
November 2011, Week 4
November 2011, Week 3
November 2011, Week 2
November 2011, Week 1
October 2011, Week 5
October 2011, Week 4
October 2011, Week 3
October 2011, Week 2
October 2011, Week 1
September 2011, Week 5
September 2011, Week 4
September 2011, Week 3
September 2011, Week 2
September 2011, Week 1
August 2011, Week 5
August 2011, Week 4
August 2011, Week 3
August 2011, Week 2
August 2011, Week 1
July 2011, Week 4
July 2011, Week 3
July 2011, Week 2
July 2011, Week 1
June 2011, Week 4
June 2011, Week 3
June 2011, Week 2
June 2011, Week 1
May 2011, Week 5
May 2011, Week 4
May 2011, Week 3
May 2011, Week 2
May 2011, Week 1
April 2011, Week 4
April 2011, Week 3
April 2011, Week 2
April 2011, Week 1
March 2011, Week 5
March 2011, Week 4
March 2011, Week 3
March 2011, Week 2
March 2011, Week 1
February 2011, Week 4
February 2011, Week 3
February 2011, Week 2
February 2011, Week 1
January 2011, Week 5
January 2011, Week 4
January 2011, Week 3
January 2011, Week 2
January 2011, Week 1
December 2010, Week 5
December 2010, Week 4
December 2010, Week 3
December 2010, Week 2
December 2010, Week 1
November 2010, Week 4
November 2010, Week 3
November 2010, Week 2
November 2010, Week 1
October 2010, Week 5
October 2010, Week 4
October 2010, Week 3
October 2010, Week 2
October 2010, Week 1
September 2010, Week 5
September 2010, Week 4
September 2010, Week 3
September 2010, Week 2
September 2010, Week 1
August 2010, Week 5
August 2010, Week 4
August 2010, Week 3
August 2010, Week 2
August 2010, Week 1
July 2010, Week 5
July 2010, Week 4
July 2010, Week 3
July 2010, Week 2
July 2010, Week 1
June 2010, Week 5
June 2010, Week 4
June 2010, Week 3
June 2010, Week 2
June 2010, Week 1
May 2010, Week 5
May 2010, Week 4
May 2010, Week 3
May 2010, Week 2
May 2010, Week 1
April 2010, Week 5
April 2010, Week 4
April 2010, Week 3
April 2010, Week 2
April 2010, Week 1
March 2010, Week 5
March 2010, Week 4
March 2010, Week 3
March 2010, Week 2
March 2010, Week 1
February 2010, Week 4
February 2010, Week 3
February 2010, Week 2
February 2010, Week 1
January 2010, Week 5
January 2010, Week 4
January 2010, Week 3
January 2010, Week 2
January 2010, Week 1
December 2009, Week 5
December 2009, Week 4
December 2009, Week 3
December 2009, Week 2
December 2009, Week 1
November 2009, Week 5
November 2009, Week 4
November 2009, Week 3
November 2009, Week 2
November 2009, Week 1
October 2009, Week 5
October 2009, Week 4
October 2009, Week 3
October 2009, Week 2
October 2009, Week 1
September 2009, Week 5
September 2009, Week 4
September 2009, Week 3
September 2009, Week 2
September 2009, Week 1
August 2009, Week 5
August 2009, Week 4
August 2009, Week 3
August 2009, Week 2
August 2009, Week 1
July 2009, Week 5
July 2009, Week 4
July 2009, Week 3
July 2009, Week 2
July 2009, Week 1
June 2009, Week 5
June 2009, Week 4
June 2009, Week 3
June 2009, Week 2
June 2009, Week 1
May 2009, Week 5
May 2009, Week 4
May 2009, Week 3
May 2009, Week 2
May 2009, Week 1
April 2009, Week 5
April 2009, Week 4
April 2009, Week 3
April 2009, Week 2
April 2009, Week 1
March 2009, Week 5
March 2009, Week 4
March 2009, Week 3
March 2009, Week 2
March 2009, Week 1
February 2009, Week 4
February 2009, Week 3
February 2009, Week 2
February 2009, Week 1
January 2009, Week 5
January 2009, Week 4
January 2009, Week 3
January 2009, Week 2
January 2009, Week 1
December 2008, Week 5
December 2008, Week 4
December 2008, Week 3
December 2008, Week 2
December 2008, Week 1
November 2008, Week 5
November 2008, Week 4
November 2008, Week 3
November 2008, Week 2
November 2008, Week 1
October 2008, Week 5
October 2008, Week 4
October 2008, Week 3
October 2008, Week 2
October 2008, Week 1
September 2008, Week 5
September 2008, Week 4
September 2008, Week 3
September 2008, Week 2
September 2008, Week 1
August 2008, Week 5
August 2008, Week 4
August 2008, Week 3
August 2008, Week 2
August 2008, Week 1
July 2008, Week 5
July 2008, Week 4
July 2008, Week 3
July 2008, Week 2
July 2008, Week 1
June 2008, Week 5
June 2008, Week 4
June 2008, Week 3
June 2008, Week 2
June 2008, Week 1
May 2008, Week 5
May 2008, Week 4
May 2008, Week 3
May 2008, Week 2
May 2008, Week 1
April 2008, Week 5
April 2008, Week 4
April 2008, Week 3
April 2008, Week 2
April 2008, Week 1
March 2008, Week 5
March 2008, Week 4
March 2008, Week 3
March 2008, Week 2
March 2008, Week 1
February 2008, Week 5
February 2008, Week 4
February 2008, Week 3
February 2008, Week 2
February 2008, Week 1
January 2008, Week 5
January 2008, Week 4
January 2008, Week 3
January 2008, Week 2
January 2008, Week 1
December 2007, Week 5
December 2007, Week 4
December 2007, Week 3
December 2007, Week 2
December 2007, Week 1
November 2007, Week 5
November 2007, Week 4
November 2007, Week 3
November 2007, Week 2
November 2007, Week 1
October 2007, Week 5
October 2007, Week 4
October 2007, Week 3
October 2007, Week 2
October 2007, Week 1
September 2007, Week 5
September 2007, Week 4
September 2007, Week 3
September 2007, Week 2
September 2007, Week 1
August 2007, Week 5
August 2007, Week 4
August 2007, Week 3
August 2007, Week 2
August 2007, Week 1
July 2007, Week 5
July 2007, Week 4
July 2007, Week 3
July 2007, Week 2
July 2007, Week 1
June 2007, Week 5
June 2007, Week 4
June 2007, Week 3
June 2007, Week 2
June 2007, Week 1
May 2007, Week 5
May 2007, Week 4
May 2007, Week 3
May 2007, Week 2
May 2007, Week 1
April 2007, Week 5
April 2007, Week 4
April 2007, Week 3
April 2007, Week 2
April 2007, Week 1
March 2007, Week 5
March 2007, Week 4
March 2007, Week 3
March 2007, Week 2
March 2007, Week 1
February 2007, Week 4
February 2007, Week 3
February 2007, Week 2
February 2007, Week 1
January 2007, Week 5
January 2007, Week 4
January 2007, Week 3
January 2007, Week 2
January 2007, Week 1
December 2006, Week 5
December 2006, Week 4
December 2006, Week 3
December 2006, Week 2
December 2006, Week 1
November 2006, Week 5
November 2006, Week 4
November 2006, Week 3
November 2006, Week 2
November 2006, Week 1
October 2006, Week 5
October 2006, Week 4
October 2006, Week 3
October 2006, Week 2
October 2006, Week 1
September 2006, Week 5
September 2006, Week 4
September 2006, Week 3
September 2006, Week 2
September 2006, Week 1
August 2006, Week 5
August 2006, Week 4
August 2006, Week 3
August 2006, Week 2
August 2006, Week 1
July 2006, Week 5
July 2006, Week 4
July 2006, Week 3
July 2006, Week 2
July 2006, Week 1
June 2006, Week 5
June 2006, Week 4
June 2006, Week 3
June 2006, Week 2
June 2006, Week 1
May 2006, Week 5
May 2006, Week 4
May 2006, Week 3
May 2006, Week 2
May 2006, Week 1
April 2006, Week 5
April 2006, Week 4
April 2006, Week 3
April 2006, Week 2
April 2006, Week 1
March 2006, Week 5
March 2006, Week 4
March 2006, Week 3
March 2006, Week 2
March 2006, Week 1
February 2006, Week 4
February 2006, Week 3
February 2006, Week 2
February 2006, Week 1
January 2006, Week 5
January 2006, Week 4
January 2006, Week 3
January 2006, Week 2
January 2006, Week 1
December 2005, Week 5
December 2005, Week 4
December 2005, Week 3
December 2005, Week 2
December 2005, Week 1
November 2005, Week 5
November 2005, Week 4
November 2005, Week 3
November 2005, Week 2
November 2005, Week 1
October 2005, Week 5
October 2005, Week 4
October 2005, Week 3
October 2005, Week 2
October 2005, Week 1
September 2005, Week 5
September 2005, Week 4
September 2005, Week 3
September 2005, Week 2
September 2005, Week 1
August 2005, Week 5
August 2005, Week 4
August 2005, Week 3
August 2005, Week 2
August 2005, Week 1
July 2005, Week 5
July 2005, Week 4
July 2005, Week 3
July 2005, Week 2
July 2005, Week 1
June 2005, Week 5
June 2005, Week 4
June 2005, Week 3
June 2005, Week 2
June 2005, Week 1
May 2005, Week 5
May 2005, Week 4
May 2005, Week 3
May 2005, Week 2
May 2005, Week 1
April 2005, Week 5
April 2005, Week 4
April 2005, Week 3
April 2005, Week 2
April 2005, Week 1
March 2005, Week 5
March 2005, Week 4
March 2005, Week 3
March 2005, Week 2
March 2005, Week 1
February 2005, Week 4
February 2005, Week 3
February 2005, Week 2
February 2005, Week 1
January 2005, Week 5
January 2005, Week 4
January 2005, Week 3
January 2005, Week 2
January 2005, Week 1
December 2004, Week 5
December 2004, Week 4
December 2004, Week 3
December 2004, Week 2
December 2004, Week 1
November 2004, Week 5
November 2004, Week 4
November 2004, Week 3
November 2004, Week 2
November 2004, Week 1
October 2004, Week 5
October 2004, Week 4
October 2004, Week 3
October 2004, Week 2
October 2004, Week 1
September 2004, Week 5
September 2004, Week 4
September 2004, Week 3
September 2004, Week 2
September 2004, Week 1
August 2004, Week 5
August 2004, Week 4
August 2004, Week 3
August 2004, Week 2
August 2004, Week 1
July 2004, Week 5
July 2004, Week 4
July 2004, Week 3
July 2004, Week 2
July 2004, Week 1
June 2004, Week 5
June 2004, Week 4
June 2004, Week 3
June 2004, Week 2
June 2004, Week 1
May 2004, Week 5
May 2004, Week 4
May 2004, Week 3
May 2004, Week 2
May 2004, Week 1
April 2004, Week 5
April 2004, Week 4
April 2004, Week 3
April 2004, Week 2
April 2004, Week 1
March 2004, Week 5
March 2004, Week 4
March 2004, Week 3
March 2004, Week 2
March 2004, Week 1
February 2004, Week 5
February 2004, Week 4
February 2004, Week 3
February 2004, Week 2
February 2004, Week 1
January 2004, Week 5
January 2004, Week 4
January 2004, Week 3
January 2004, Week 2
January 2004, Week 1
December 2003, Week 5
December 2003, Week 4
December 2003, Week 3
December 2003, Week 2
December 2003, Week 1
November 2003, Week 5
November 2003, Week 4
November 2003, Week 3
November 2003, Week 2
November 2003, Week 1
October 2003, Week 5
October 2003, Week 4
October 2003, Week 3
October 2003, Week 2
October 2003, Week 1
September 2003, Week 5
September 2003, Week 4
September 2003, Week 3
September 2003, Week 2
September 2003, Week 1
August 2003, Week 5
August 2003, Week 4
August 2003, Week 3
August 2003, Week 2
August 2003, Week 1
July 2003, Week 5
July 2003, Week 4
July 2003, Week 3
July 2003, Week 2
July 2003, Week 1
June 2003, Week 5
June 2003, Week 4
June 2003, Week 3
June 2003, Week 2
June 2003, Week 1
May 2003, Week 5
May 2003, Week 4
May 2003, Week 3
May 2003, Week 2
May 2003, Week 1
April 2003, Week 5
April 2003, Week 4
April 2003, Week 3
April 2003, Week 2
March 2003, Week 5
March 2003, Week 4
March 2003, Week 3
March 2003, Week 2
March 2003, Week 1
February 2003, Week 4
February 2003, Week 3
February 2003, Week 2
February 2003, Week 1
January 2003, Week 5
January 2003, Week 4
January 2003, Week 3
January 2003, Week 2
January 2003, Week 1
December 2002, Week 5
December 2002, Week 4
December 2002, Week 3
December 2002, Week 2
December 2002, Week 1
November 2002, Week 4
November 2002, Week 3
November 2002, Week 2
November 2002, Week 1
October 2002, Week 5
October 2002, Week 4
October 2002, Week 3
October 2002, Week 2
October 2002, Week 1
September 2002, Week 5
September 2002, Week 4
September 2002, Week 3
September 2002, Week 2
September 2002, Week 1
August 2002, Week 5
August 2002, Week 4
August 2002, Week 3
August 2002, Week 2
August 2002, Week 1
July 2002, Week 5
July 2002, Week 4
July 2002, Week 3
July 2002, Week 2
July 2002, Week 1
June 2002, Week 5
June 2002, Week 4
June 2002, Week 3
June 2002, Week 2
June 2002, Week 1
May 2002, Week 5
May 2002, Week 4
May 2002, Week 3
May 2002, Week 2
May 2002, Week 1
April 2002, Week 5
April 2002, Week 4
April 2002, Week 3
April 2002, Week 2
April 2002, Week 1
March 2002, Week 5
March 2002, Week 4
March 2002, Week 3
March 2002, Week 1
February 2002, Week 4
February 2002, Week 3
February 2002, Week 2
February 2002, Week 1
January 2002, Week 5
January 2002, Week 4
January 2002, Week 3
January 2002, Week 2
January 2002, Week 1
December 2001, Week 5
December 2001, Week 4
December 2001, Week 3
December 2001, Week 2
December 2001, Week 1
November 2001, Week 5
November 2001, Week 4
November 2001, Week 3
November 2001, Week 2
November 2001, Week 1
October 2001, Week 5
October 2001, Week 4
October 2001, Week 3
October 2001, Week 2
October 2001, Week 1
September 2001, Week 5
September 2001, Week 4
September 2001, Week 3
September 2001, Week 2
September 2001, Week 1
August 2001, Week 5
August 2001, Week 4
August 2001, Week 3
August 2001, Week 2
August 2001, Week 1
July 2001, Week 5
July 2001, Week 4
July 2001, Week 3
July 2001, Week 2
July 2001, Week 1
June 2001, Week 5
June 2001, Week 4
June 2001, Week 3
June 2001, Week 2
June 2001, Week 1
May 2001, Week 5
May 2001, Week 4
May 2001, Week 3
May 2001, Week 2
May 2001, Week 1
April 2001, Week 5
April 2001, Week 4
April 2001, Week 3
April 2001, Week 2
April 2001, Week 1
March 2001, Week 5
March 2001, Week 4
March 2001, Week 3
March 2001, Week 2
March 2001, Week 1
February 2001, Week 4
February 2001, Week 3
February 2001, Week 2
February 2001, Week 1
January 2001, Week 5
January 2001, Week 4
January 2001, Week 3
January 2001, Week 2
January 2001, Week 1
December 2000, Week 5
December 2000, Week 4
December 2000, Week 3
December 2000, Week 2
December 2000, Week 1
November 2000, Week 5
November 2000, Week 4
November 2000, Week 3
November 2000, Week 2
November 2000, Week 1
October 2000, Week 5
October 2000, Week 4
October 2000, Week 3
October 2000, Week 2
October 2000, Week 1
September 2000, Week 5
September 2000, Week 4
September 2000, Week 3
September 2000, Week 2
September 2000, Week 1
August 2000, Week 5
August 2000, Week 4
August 2000, Week 3
August 2000, Week 2
August 2000, Week 1
July 2000, Week 5
July 2000, Week 4
July 2000, Week 3
July 2000, Week 2
July 2000, Week 1
June 2000, Week 5
June 2000, Week 4
June 2000, Week 3
June 2000, Week 2
June 2000, Week 1
May 2000, Week 5
May 2000, Week 4
May 2000, Week 3
May 2000, Week 2
May 2000, Week 1
April 2000, Week 5
April 2000, Week 4
April 2000, Week 3
April 2000, Week 2
April 2000, Week 1
March 2000, Week 5
March 2000, Week 4
March 2000, Week 3
March 2000, Week 2
March 2000, Week 1
February 2000, Week 5
February 2000, Week 4
February 2000, Week 3
February 2000, Week 2
February 2000, Week 1
January 2000, Week 5
January 2000, Week 4
January 2000, Week 3
January 2000, Week 2
January 2000, Week 1
December 1999, Week 5
December 1999, Week 4
December 1999, Week 3
December 1999, Week 2
December 1999, Week 1
November 1999, Week 5
November 1999, Week 4
November 1999, Week 3
November 1999, Week 2
November 1999, Week 1
October 1999, Week 5
October 1999, Week 4
October 1999, Week 3
October 1999, Week 2
October 1999, Week 1
September 1999, Week 5
September 1999, Week 4
September 1999, Week 3
September 1999, Week 2
September 1999, Week 1
August 1999, Week 5
August 1999, Week 4
August 1999, Week 3
August 1999, Week 2
August 1999, Week 1
July 1999, Week 5
July 1999, Week 4
July 1999, Week 3
July 1999, Week 2
July 1999, Week 1
June 1999, Week 5
June 1999, Week 4
June 1999, Week 3
June 1999, Week 2
June 1999, Week 1
May 1999, Week 5
May 1999, Week 4
May 1999, Week 3
May 1999, Week 2
May 1999, Week 1
April 1999, Week 5
April 1999, Week 4
April 1999, Week 3
April 1999, Week 2
April 1999, Week 1
March 1999, Week 5
March 1999, Week 4
March 1999, Week 3
March 1999, Week 2
March 1999, Week 1
February 1999, Week 5
February 1999, Week 4
February 1999, Week 3
February 1999, Week 2
February 1999, Week 1
January 1999, Week 5
January 1999, Week 4
January 1999, Week 3
January 1999, Week 2
January 1999, Week 1
December 1998, Week 5
December 1998, Week 4
December 1998, Week 3
December 1998, Week 2
December 1998, Week 1
November 1998, Week 5
November 1998, Week 4
November 1998, Week 3
November 1998, Week 2
November 1998, Week 1
October 1998, Week 5
October 1998, Week 4
October 1998, Week 3
October 1998, Week 2
October 1998, Week 1
September 1998, Week 5
September 1998, Week 4
September 1998, Week 3
September 1998, Week 2
September 1998, Week 1
August 1998, Week 4
August 1998, Week 3
August 1998, Week 2
August 1998, Week 1
July 1998, Week 5
July 1998, Week 4
July 1998, Week 3
July 1998, Week 2
July 1998, Week 1
June 1998, Week 5
June 1998, Week 4
June 1998, Week 3
June 1998, Week 2
June 1998, Week 1
May 1998, Week 5
May 1998, Week 4
May 1998, Week 3
May 1998, Week 2
May 1998, Week 1
April 1998, Week 5
April 1998, Week 4
April 1998, Week 3
April 1998, Week 2
April 1998, Week 1
March 1998, Week 5
March 1998, Week 4
March 1998, Week 3
March 1998, Week 2
March 1998, Week 1
February 1998, Week 5
February 1998, Week 4
February 1998, Week 3
February 1998, Week 2
February 1998, Week 1
January 1998, Week 5
January 1998, Week 4
January 1998, Week 3
January 1998, Week 2
January 1998, Week 1
December 1997, Week 5
December 1997, Week 4
December 1997, Week 3
December 1997, Week 2
December 1997, Week 1
November 1997, Week 5
November 1997, Week 4
November 1997, Week 3
November 1997, Week 2
November 1997, Week 1
October 1997, Week 5
October 1997, Week 4
October 1997, Week 3
October 1997, Week 2
October 1997, Week 1
September 1997, Week 5
September 1997, Week 4
September 1997, Week 3
September 1997, Week 2
September 1997, Week 1
August 1997, Week 5
August 1997, Week 4
August 1997, Week 3
August 1997, Week 2
August 1997, Week 1
July 1997, Week 5
July 1997, Week 4
July 1997, Week 3
July 1997, Week 2
July 1997, Week 1
June 1997, Week 5
June 1997, Week 4
June 1997, Week 3
June 1997, Week 2
June 1997, Week 1
May 1997, Week 5
May 1997, Week 4
May 1997, Week 3
May 1997, Week 2
May 1997, Week 1
April 1997, Week 5
April 1997, Week 4
April 1997, Week 3
April 1997, Week 2
April 1997, Week 1
March 1997, Week 5
March 1997, Week 4
March 1997, Week 3
March 1997, Week 2
March 1997, Week 1
February 1997, Week 5
February 1997, Week 4
February 1997, Week 3
February 1997, Week 2
February 1997, Week 1

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager