There are 24 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
From: taliesin the storyteller
1b. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
From: Henrik Theiling
1c. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
From: James W.
1d. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
From: Jim Henry
1e. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
From: Paul Bennett
1f. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
From: Eldin Raigmore
1g. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
From: Yahya Abdal-Aziz
1h. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
From: Benct Philip Jonsson
1i. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
From: Dennis Paul Himes
1j. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
From: scott
2. Re: "gender" systems = vowel harmony coalescing with stress changes?
From: Wesley Parish
3. Re: Weekly Vocab #5.3 (original)
From: Henrik Theiling
4a. Re: Difficult language ideas
From: Leigh Richards
4b. Re: Difficult language ideas
From: Yahya Abdal-Aziz
5. Re: lykanthropos
From: R A Brown
6a. Re: Dominus (Was: Re: Werewolf)
From: Benct Philip Jonsson
6b. Alveopalatals (fuit: Re: Dominus (Was: Re: Werewolf))
From: Benct Philip Jonsson
7. Re: Gmane
From: Philip Newton
8a. Re: Werewolf
From: Benct Philip Jonsson
8b. Re: Werewolf
From: caeruleancentaur
8c. Re: Werewolf
From: Henrik Theiling
9a. Re: Transcription exercise
From: Benct Philip Jonsson
9b. Re: Transcription exercise
From: Paul Roser
10. FW: Call for papers on Vantage Theory on LINGUIST list
From: Yahya Abdal-Aziz
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
Posted by: "taliesin the storyteller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:34 am (PDT)
* Remi Villatel said on 2006-09-22 03:56:00 +0200
> I retrieved the largest shaquean number. As far as I know, it's
> /xotji-gēç/ [Zo.tji:gEC], or in other words 12^(12^12). You write it
> as 1 followed by over 9800 billions zeroes (in base 12). As far as you
> know, what is the largest numbers in your conlang?
I haven't finished with the numbers yet but so far the biggest is leìan,
which is 8^12 or 68 719 476 736.
The base8 system has named words for 8¹, 8², 8³ and every 8^(n*4) above
that, but I don't know how large n gets.
Largest named number in base2 is areì, 2^8 (256), which is not a lot,
largest in base5 is šīra, 5^5 (3125), largest in base24 is utarha, 24²
(576). Base8 and base24 share several names (since 8 is a simplification
of 24) and it is allowed to mix them for poetic purposes and to avoid
long strings.
Of all the bases it is base24 that is used for scientific calculations
so I expect those to go way high.
As to numbers, I'm currently looking more at names for constants, like
pi, e, etc.
t.
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
Posted by: "Henrik Theiling" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:33 am (PDT)
Hi!
Remi Villatel writes:
> ... rati saçrukuro gea, be vire klidusē pra teo tsiju ? ...
I assume you mean the largest atomic lexicon entry for a number, since
otherwise most people would answer that there is none.
In all of my a priori conlangs except Fukhian, it is 16.
This makes the languages suitable for using any base between 2 and 16
for expressing numbers.
The number system has been criticised of being too scientific for the
man on the street, because it is essentially a*b^c (only in reversed
order and recursive in c), but I personally doubt it is more
complicated than the systems in common use in natlangs.
E.g. 300 = 2 10 3
4560 = 3 10 4 5 6
**Henrik
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
Posted by: "James W." [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 7:33 am (PDT)
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 03:56:00 +0200, "Remi Villatel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
>
>
> As far as you know, what is the
> largest numbers in your conlang?
>
The largest single root in aaseka`eni is maatun: 20^4 (base 20 system).
I haven't worked out how to get bigger numbers from it yet.
--------
James W.
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1d. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
Posted by: "Jim Henry" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 7:46 am (PDT)
On 9/21/06, Remi Villatel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> bē ri blēsēr ?
>
....
>As far as you know, what is the
> largest numbers in your conlang?
The largest finite number expressed by a root
word in gzb is źyjm /dz)Ujm/ - 4294967296, or 16^8.
(gzb has two alternate series of power-of-base
words, one for base 10 and one for base 16.)
The largest transfinite number expressed by a root
word in gzb is źîku /'dz)y.ku/ - aleph-one.
gzb doesn't have a system for expressing arbitrary
transfinites, yet; I reckon I could express them
with the conjunction "me" (raised to the power of)
used with the root word for aleph-one. I.e.,
źîku-me-źîku = aleph-two
źîku-me-źîku-me-źîku = aleph-three
...this would rapidly get tedious, but I don't
expect a need to talk about higher transfinites
very often.
I probably need a separate root for the power
of the continuum as well. Maybe I should
change źîku to mean the power of the continuum
instead of aleph-one (they're conjectured
but not proven to be equal, last I heard) and
express aleph-one as a power of
cĕku /'ts)@.ku/, aleph-null?
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/gzb/gzb.htm
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1e. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
Posted by: "Paul Bennett" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:03 am (PDT)
-----Original Message-----
>From: Remi Villatel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>As far as you know, what is the largest numbers in your conlang?
Conlangingly, I'm not sure. If I make a Modern stage of Thagojian, they'll have
all the tools of modern math at their disposal, including Graham numbers and
other things too hideous to contemplate.
The largest number for which I have invented a word (in a natlang (English))
was "sexgoogol", which I think means 10^(100^6), but I never could properly
figure out whether I'd constructed / interpreted it properly. Turns out it was
the wrong word to use for the quantity I had in mind, anyway, which IIRC was
"centillion".
I don't even remember the context it was in, but I have a vague feeling it had
to do with encryption and/or compression.
Paul
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1f. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
Posted by: "Eldin Raigmore" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:24 am (PDT)
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 03:56:00 +0200, Remi Villatel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[snip]
>Hi list,
>I was looking through my conlang files. I found a file I was absolutely
>sure that I had lost or destroyed it. It was about the very large numbers.
>So I retrieved the largest shaquean number. As far as I know, it's
>/xotji-gēç/ [Zo.tji:gEC], or in other words 12^(12^12). You write it as
>1 followed by over 9800 billions zeroes (in base 12).
>As far as you know, what is the largest numbers in your conlang?
>See you soon,
>[snip]
>Remi Villatel
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>=========================================================================
I fear I have not actually created the number vocabulary yet.
But I plan for it to be base-twelve (subbase four)[*]; and I plan for the
largest finite integer that can be explicitly expressed to be just less
than yours, namely,
(12^(12^12))-1.
The system will basically be:
base twelve up to (twelve ^ twelve) -1;
then base (twelve ^ twelve) up to (twelve ^ (twelve^2))-1;
then base (twelve ^ (twelve^2)) up to (twelve ^ (twelve^3))-1;
then base (twelve ^ (twelve^3)) up to (twelve ^ (twelve^4))-1;
...
then base (twelve ^ (twelve^8)) up to (twelve ^ (twelve^9))-1;
then base (twelve ^ (twelve^9)) up to (twelve ^ (twelve^ten))-1;
then base (twelve ^ (twelve^ten)) up to (twelve ^ (twelve^eleven))-1;
then base (twelve ^ (twelve^eleven)) up to (twelve ^ (twelve^twelve))-1.
[*] "subbase four" means it will be base four up to eleven.
-----
eldin
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1g. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
Posted by: "Yahya Abdal-Aziz" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 10:59 am (PDT)
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Remi Villatel wrote:
...
> I was looking through my conlang files. I found a file I was absolutely sure
> that I had lost or destroyed it. It was about the very large numbers. So I
> retrieved the largest shaquean number. As far as I know, it's /xotji-gēç/
> [Zo.tji:gEC], or in other words 12^(12^12). You write it as 1 followed by
> over 9800 billions zeroes (in base 12). As far as you know, what is the
> largest numbers in your conlang?
---
Hi Remi,
Uiama counts in sixes; large numbers are powers of the group "latasa" = fourth
power of 6. Selected numbers below (words in parentheses are understood):
---
sa = 1
pa = 2
ka = 3
la = 4
xa = 5
tasa = 6 (times) 1 = 6
tasa sa = 6 (times) 1 (plus) 1 = 7
tasa pa = 6 (times) 1 (plus) 2 = 8
...
tasa xa = 6 (times) 1 (plus) 5 = 11
tapa = 6 (times) 2 = 12
tapa sa = 6 (times) 2 (plus) 1 = 13
...
taxa xa = 6 (times) 5 (plus) 5 = 35
tatasa = 6 (times) 6 (times) 1 = 6^2 = 36
tatasa sa = 6 (times) 6 (times) 1 (plus) 1 = 37
...
tataxa taxa xa = 6 (times) 6 (times) 5 (plus) 6 (times) 5 (plus) 5 = 215
tatatasa = 6 (times) 6 (times) 6 (times) 1 = 6^3 = 216
tatatasa sa = 6 (times) 6 (times) 6 (times) 1 (plus) 1 = 217
...
tatataxa tataxa taxa xa = 6 (times) 6 (times) 6 (times) 5 (plus) 6 (times) 6
(times) 5 (plus) 6 (times) 5 (plus) 5 = 1,295
latasa = 4 (factors of) 6 (times) 1 = 6^4 = 1,296
...
latapa = 4 (factors of) 6 (times) 2 = 6^4x2 = 2,592
...
lataxa tatataxa tataxa taxa xa = 6 (times) 6 (times) 6 (times) 6 (times) 5
(plus) 6 (times) 6 (times) 6 (times) 5 (plus) 6 (times) 6 (times) 5 (plus) 6
(times) 5 (plus) 5 = 1,296^6 - 1
tasa latasa = 6 (factors) of 4 (factors of) 6 (times) 1 = (6^4)^6 = 1,296^6
...
latasa latasa = 1,296 (factors of) 1,296 = 1,296^1,296
...
latasa latasa latasa = 1,296 (factors of) 1,296 (factors of) 1,296 =
1,296^1,296^1,296
---
This is the largest number commonly used, but mostly in expressions, since the
Uiama Makpo have little everyday use for numbers which dwarf the googolplex (a
mere 10^10^100). However, their cosmology produces very different estimates of
the number of entities in their universe than our modern physics does here, for
which a googolplex certainly suffices.
Interesting timing: I was just in the throes of writing up the larger numbers
of Uiama when your question arrived. The documentation is still not complete;
for example, additional particles ensure precision in conveying exact numbers
where necessary, connecting digits by:
i = with
ki = similar; multiply
ro = grow, power of, exponentiate
and so on. And fractions will be fun; everyday terms use the convenient
divisibility of 6 by 2 and 3, and of 6^4 by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 12, 15, 16, ...
648, whilst technical uses mirror the structure of the positive integers, but
using negative exponents.
Regards,
Yahya
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.7/454 - Release Date: 21/9/06
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1h. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
Posted by: "Benct Philip Jonsson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:19 pm (PDT)
Not conlang, but very big:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_large_numbers#Ancient_India>
I tried to find a list of these Sanskrit words for powers, but
couldn't.
Remi Villatel skrev:
> bē ri blēsēr ?
>
> kejiri saçrukuro rākuzē loilo, je sōle liuro tae'kja. jē rākuzē gār, be
> jēezis tē'kja. dētu, kajā tēye çkikōjhte : be gāre grerē pelo çokta ta'kja.
> sōje klidusē tsiju vire libo tiyō'dēta. yōjē çakej klidusē tsiju gār, be
> za-jēezis jē'kja. kajā jipiki : be vire xotji-gēç tiyō'dēta ; tlaji ; ba
> (10^10)^10. ri xogēç ske kibo, be vire fāj taja tiyō txelaobi. ratā
> jipiki : rati saçrukuro gea, be vire klidusē pra teo tsiju ?
>
> tul'xeje zatō'kja.
> --------------
>
> Hi list,
>
> I was looking through my conlang files. I found a file I was absolutely sure
> that I had lost or destroyed it. It was about the very large numbers. So I
> retrieved the largest shaquean number. As far as I know, it's /xotji-gēç/
> [Zo.tji:gEC], or in other words 12^(12^12). You write it as 1 followed by
> over 9800 billions zeroes (in base 12). As far as you know, what is the
> largest numbers in your conlang?
>
> See you soon,
>
> (Ouch! I blew up a few neurons to make this translation...) ;-)
>
--
/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
"Maybe" is a strange word. When mum or dad says it
it means "yes", but when my big brothers say it it
means "no"!
(Philip Jonsson jr, age 7)
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1i. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
Posted by: "Dennis Paul Himes" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:05 pm (PDT)
Remi Villatel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As far as you know, what is the largest numbers in your conlang?
For Gladilatian, it's _fryma_, the cardinality of the reals.
============================================================================
Dennis Paul Himes <> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.cshore.com/himes/dennis.htm
Gladilatian page: http://home.cshore.com/himes/glad/lang.htm
Seezzitonian page: http://home.cshore.com/himes/umuto/lang.htm
Disclaimer: "True, I talk of dreams; which are the children of an idle
brain, begot of nothing but vain fantasy; which is as thin of substance as
the air." - Romeo & Juliet, Act I Scene iv Verse 96-99
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1j. Re: The biggest number you know in your conlang
Posted by: "scott" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:29 pm (PDT)
On Sep 21, 2006, at 9:56 PM, Remi Villatel wrote:
> what is the largest numbers in your conlang?
Technically that would be ganik -- infinity.
Realistically (and without inventing new terminology) the largest
number expressable in one word is 90,000,000,000 : 90 billion --
inënoinënoden. The largest number expressable without inventing new
terminology would be 99,999,999,999.
inëno -- nine
den -- the root for/of? ten
Large numbers are basically expressed as xy-den = x times 10^(1+y).
This system just sort of came to me and I have stuck with it.
scott
Wikilret Homepage: homepage.mac.com/sjcaldwell/Wikilret/
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. Re: "gender" systems = vowel harmony coalescing with stress changes?
Posted by: "Wesley Parish" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:12 am (PDT)
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 13:34, Eric Christopherson wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2006, at 7:25 AM, Wesley Parish wrote:
> > Hi. I just thought that is a reasonable explanation for "gender" in
> > Indo-European languages. And probably in other "gendered" language
> > families
> > such as the Afro-Asiatic family.
> >
> > Are there any books, articles, etc, that ask this sort of question?
>
> Perhaps you could explain your ideas about how they might be
> related. I'm intrigued by the premise, but I can't seem to visualize
> a connection.
The vowel harmony part of the question derives from the fact that most
"feminine" gendered nouns in the Indo-European and the Semitic languages have
'a' stems, to use a latinism - in Greek, it's 'e' stems. I got to thinking
that vowel harmony would apply primarily to the phrase, with many of the 'a'
stem words not taking 'i' stem adjectives, and vice versa.
The question's also partly inspired by Swahili's prefixed categories. As of
now I don't know nearly enough about Bantu languages to recast the question
for them.
I'm assuming that PIE and Proto-Afro-Asiatic had a fixed stress. And that the
phrasal vowel harmony I'm postulating contributed to that.
At the moment I'm mostly thinking out loud - I think I'll need to reread my
linguistics books to work my thoughts out better.
Thanks
Wesley Parish
--
Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish
-------------
Mau ki ana, he aha te mea nui?
You ask, "What is the most important thing?"
Maku ki ana, he tangata, he tangata, he tangata.
I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people."
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. Re: Weekly Vocab #5.3 (original)
Posted by: "Henrik Theiling" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:02 am (PDT)
It took a while since it was long, and although I enjoyed the sample
sentences very much, I did not find the time to translate them, too.
Too many new words. Anyway, here's my word list:
apple mjöl < *melum < malum
(was -e- in melum really short?
Italian has 'melo', indicating
long -e- instead, and -a- in
malum was also long.)
bread pænn < panis
schedule hórær < *horarium
wagon körr < carrus
bus hórærikörr < horarii + carrus
(like Icelandic 'áætlunarbíll')
train tregnir < *traginius << *traginare
ticket skjöðul < *schedula
bus ticket hórærikerriskjöðul < horarii + carri + schedula
train ticket tregniskjöðul < traginii + schedula
butter bútur < *butyrum
cheese kæsir < caseus
cream natt < *natta <? *matta?
ink þólg < ?*fulga <? fuligo
fruit þrúktur < fructus
mush dæktur < decoctus
jam/marmelade þrýktidæktur < fructi + decoctus
(like Icelandic 'ávaxtamauk')
milk lektur < *lactis < lac
noddles/pasta past < *pasta? {loan from another romlang}
salad salat < *salata
sausage síkk < *isicium
soap sápa < sapo(n) {loan from Germanic}
free of duties hvittur < *quietus
mark, sign, tag sign < signum
postage stamp hvittsign < *quiet- + signum
toilet lætrin < latrina
paper pepirr < papyrus
toilet paper lætrinipepirr < latrinae + papyrus
**Henrik
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: Difficult language ideas
Posted by: "Leigh Richards" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:17 am (PDT)
On 9/21/06, Sai Emrys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Language-wise, I mean syntactic ambiguity. I'm not trying to eliminate
> > even that, but only to make it unlikely that a given sentence can be
> > parsed in more than one way. The 'Time flies like an arrow' sort of
> > example is mostly what I want to avoid. As for semantics, I also want
> > to make it easy (with as little circumlocution as possible) to clarify
> > meaning.
>
> FWIW that example's not ambiguous when spoken, due to stress patterns.
> Is that sufficient for your purposes? It would also fit your desire
> for minor changes (eg stress) to create major semantic shifts.
Only if you're trying to make it sufficient. At least, that's the case
for me. It works better with plurals, because if there were such
beasts as time flies, I wouldn't say they like 'an arrow' but rather
'arrows'; in that case my stress would be the same whether 'time' is
modifier or noun, though it would be different if it is the verb. To
emphasize, I would exaggerate stress, or pause after either 'time' or
'flies', and that would only happen if I realized that there could be
a misunderstanding beforehand. But not recording certain spoken
features in the written language is one way I had thought of to make
the writing more ambiguous.
Messages in this topic (28)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: Difficult language ideas
Posted by: "Yahya Abdal-Aziz" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:45 pm (PDT)
Hi Leigh,
Welcome to the list!
What difficult language design goals you've set yourself! But
luckily, many list members have shared some potentially great ideas
for you to mull over. I have no great ideas for you here, but would
like to follow up a part of your conversation with H S Teoh:
[Teoh]
As for small changes having large impact on the meaning, maybe
introduce a lot of idioms and idiosyncrasies which requires a lot of
cultural background to correctly infer the meaning of?
[Leigh Richards]
Hmm. That gives me an idea. It isn't a language likely to develop many
idioms, but it could very well have taken idioms from various
languages throughout the years and turned them to its own purposes. I
like that.
[Teoh]
OK. But based on what you wrote, it seems that the speakers of your
language are out to deliberately obfuscate their speech (or at least
raise the barrier to learning as much as they can). I think the idioms
idea is still applicable: they can take advantage of experiences or
knowledge privy to the "in-crowd", even if they don't have a rich
cultural heritage as such---e.g., if they are being persecuted, there
may be stories or rumors passed between them, with a mutual
understanding on the "actual" significance of the events (as interpreted
by one of their own), such that instead of describing something
explicitly, they refer to said events in some way that seems meaningless
or even completely the opposite to the outsider.
You could even turn the names of such events into verbs or adjectives,
or something else (this is actually attested in natlangs). An outsider
would recognize the reference to the event, but have no idea what it
might denote when used in that way.
-------------
[Yahya]
This rings a bell. My wife and I have, over the course of decades
and quite unintentionally, evolved a private language, based entirely
on the fact that both of us are wont to burst into a phrase from a
song that relates to something that just happened or was just said.
Examples:
1. Today, we were drinking coffee at the kitchen table, when my wife
picked up the phone to make a call. I sang "Ghost Busters"; which she
quite naturally and correctly understood to mean "Who ya gunna call?"
2. She was carrying the vaporiser to be emptied, and spilt a little of
the water. My saying "Tom Jones" here meant "It's not unusual". Of
course, on returning home in the car, saying "Tom Jones" means
"[I see] The Green Green Grass of Home".
Other song associations include:
- "Barbra Streisand" (People ...!);
- "Beatles" (Help!, or It's Been a Hard day's Night, or (referring to
a particular acquaintance) The Fool on the Hill, or ...)
- "Stevie Wonder" (Ebony & Ivory)
- "John Lennon" (Imagine)
- "The Fonz" (Happy Days)
- "Vera Lynn" (The White Cliffs of Dover)
- "[Frank] Sinatra" (I Did it My Way)
- "Nancy Sinatra" (These Boots are Made for Walking, ie I'm leaving)
- "[Engelbert] Humperdinck" (Please release me, let me go)
- "Elvis" (Are You Lonesome Tonight?, or (Don't Step on My) [Blue]
Suede Shoes, or Crying in the Chapel (particularly for the line:
"I searched and I searched but I couldn't find" ), or ...)
But almost anything from shared culture can give rise to some
associations useful for generating unlikely synonyms. Eg, there
are also movie associations:
- "The Terminator" (I'll Be Back)
- "[Clint] Eastwood" (Are you feeling lucky?)
and ad associations:
- "Nike" (Just do it!)
- "Toyota" (Oh what a feeling)
And although it may not be PC, we still sometimes refer to anorexic
models as "Biafrans".
The songs and singers might be well-known, but if we wanted to be
more private, we could easily choose to have them represent some
of their least-, rather than their best-, known songs.
Many English poets of the 19th Century obscured their meanings
all the time, so much so that their poems became codes that only
the educated could crack, and thus served to maintain class
distinctions. Even the name of the most commonplace object (or
body part!) would be replaced by some abstruse classical allusion.
Regards,
Yahya
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.8/455 - Release Date: 22/9/06
Messages in this topic (28)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. Re: lykanthropos
Posted by: "R A Brown" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:22 am (PDT)
Dirk Elzinga wrote:
> On 9/21/06, Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> I know basically jack of Old English, but is it possible that
>> 'werewolf' itself
>> is originally a dvanda?
>
>
> I'm not following this thread closely, but this question came up for
> me as well. So I asked a colleague, who is an Old English expert, what
> he thought. It was his opinion that it is in fact a dvandva compound.
> Since he has published extensively on Old English compounding, I'm
> inclined to take his word for it.
Very interesting. A week or so back I wrote a mail on the possible
interpretations of the Greek _lykanthropos_ by comparing it with other
noun+noun compounds. The more I think about the compound, the more
convinced I am that _lykanthropos_ is also a dvandva compound.
--
Ray
==================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.
[WELSH PROVERB}
Messages in this topic (55)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6a. Re: Dominus (Was: Re: Werewolf)
Posted by: "Benct Philip Jonsson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 10:40 am (PDT)
R A Brown skrev:
> Paul Bennett wrote:
>> There are lots of apparently nonsensical[*] sound changes and
>> alternations all over PIE,
> > l/d, r/d, r/s, r/n, l/n,
There is nothing strange or random at all about these changes;
in fact in each pair the one can change into the other with
the loss or addition of a single feature, except for s > r
which is still quite natural if you consider the steps:
s > z > r\ > r. Some dialects of modern Greek have /r/
corresponding to ancient Δ, which is still a one-feature
per step change whether it was directly [d] > [4] or it
was [D] > [r\] -- or even [D] > [4]!
> I do not see anything nonsensical about medial [r] becoming [l]. It is
> AFAIK not an uncommon change, nor is it confined to IE langs.
Indeed. Moreover these changes tend to happen as remote assimilation
or dissimilation.
> [snip]
>> [*]By which I mean more or less regular, but not easily understood
>> without resorting to the "if /ni/ can become /a/" defense, which
>> verges on the Chewbaccan.
>
> But the point is that the change from archaic Chinese /ni/ to the modern
> Yangchow dialect /A/ was effected by a series of *regular* (not more or
> less, but precisely regular) sound changes. As Y.R. Chao pointed out
> (and I quote) "all the steps being reflected in other parallel changes,
> geographical as well as historical."
Notably it is not *a change* but *a series of changes*.
None of the individual changes is remarkable at all:
ni > n\z\i > z\i > z`i > z`i\ > r\= > @r\ > Ar\ > A
Where n\ transcribes Chao's symbol for alveopalatal nasal.
<digression>
Chao devised three symbols for alveopalatal stops and nasal,
which were not accepted by the IPA but are in Unicode's
Latin Extended B block as U+0221 U+0235 , U+0236.
I hereby motion that they be adopted into CXS as t\ d\ n\.
They may not be distinguished from /c/ etc. or /t_j/
etc. in any natlang, though Chao implies they are in
some form of Tibetan, but they probably are at least
important allophones in the Sohlob languages (my conlangs).
Anyway it does feel a bit daft to transcribe _nc, nj, ny_
as [Jts\ Jdz\ J] since this nasal phoneme is definitely
alveopalatal, while an actual mediopalatal nasal occurs
as an allophone of /N/.
> The point is that one cannot arbitrarily rule out a change of one set of
> sounds into another, without knowing the diachronic development of
> sounds in the related languages; I see nothing Chewbaccan in this. Thus,
> one cannot arbitrarily rule out the possibility that Latin -icella
> became -isoara in Romanian; one has to know how sounds developed from VL
> to modern Romanian.
>
Amen.
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
6b. Alveopalatals (fuit: Re: Dominus (Was: Re: Werewolf))
Posted by: "Benct Philip Jonsson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:40 am (PDT)
I wrote:
> Chao devised three symbols for alveopalatal stops and nasal,
> which were not accepted by the IPA but are in Unicode's
> Latin Extended B block as U+0221 U+0235 , U+0236.
> I hereby motion that they be adopted into CXS as t\ d\ n\.
> They may not be distinguished from /c/ etc. or /t_j/
> etc. in any natlang, though Chao implies they are in
> some form of Tibetan, but they probably are at least
> important allophones in the Sohlob languages (my conlangs).
> Anyway it does feel a bit daft to transcribe _nc, nj, ny_
> as [Jts\ Jdz\ J] since this nasal phoneme is definitely
> alveopalatal, while an actual mediopalatal nasal occurs
> as an allophone of /N/.
After sending the above I noticed that there also
is a symbol U+0234 for a alveopalatal lateral.
Too bad that both l\ and L\ are already preempted
by other sounds -- i guess it's too late to reassign
the alveolar lateral flap to 4\ or something, so
i hereby announce that BXS uses t\ d\ n\ s\ z\ l\
for alveopalatals while alveolar lateral flap is
4_l in BXS. I promise to include a note to the effect
when I use l\ according to BXS!
--
/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
"Maybe" is a strange word. When mum or dad says it
it means "yes", but when my big brothers say it it
means "no"!
(Philip Jonsson jr, age 7)
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
7. Re: Gmane
Posted by: "Philip Newton" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:39 am (PDT)
On 9/21/06, Henrik Theiling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Secondly, due to the one-way posting, discussions on this list will
> only see half the thread that is visible in the open newsgroup when
> posts arrive to the news group but not to the list,
I don't think this is a danger. To the best of my knowledge, Gmane is
only a mail-to-news and news-to-mail *gateway*, not a news server.
Posting an article results in a message to the mailing list (if that's
possible); only when the message arrives back via the list is it
available via the news interface. So as I understand it, it's not
technically possible to post a message that is visible only through
the Gmane news server but not to people subscribed to the mailing
list.
I could be wrong.
> leading to
> scattered threads and eventually to a scattered list. This is bad,
> since this is Conlang-L the one-and-only.
That would be bad indeed.
Cheers,
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
8a. Re: Werewolf
Posted by: "Benct Philip Jonsson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:06 pm (PDT)
R A Brown skrev:
> Henrik Theiling wrote:
> [snip]
>> Would you happen to know until when the term 'versipellis' was know to
>> Romans or whether it was a Vulgar Latin word at all?
>
> As a compound it would understood by Romans as "skin-changer" - but
> whether it had any currency in colloquial use is rather doubtful.
>
>> The dictionaries say it is used by Plautus,
>
> Plautus used it as an epithet of Jupiter. Later writers Pliny, Petronius
> & Appuleius use it to mean "werewolf."
>
>> but I have no clue how much it is used by
>> ordinary people, too, and how long.
>
> As far as I know, there is no indication that the word was much used (if
> at all) in colloquial speech. The evidence of the Romancelangs is that
> the the word didn't make it into Vulgar Latin.
>
>> Did it leave any trace in modern Romance?
> Not that I am aware of.
>
>> Elliot asked for the word and before that, I assumed Latin had none so
>> I compounded 'man-worf' in Þrjótrunn.
>
> All the modern Romancelangs have formed some sort of compound, whether
> of 'man' + 'wolf' as in Spanish _hombre lobo_ (Thinks: that is a counter
> example, isn't it?) or Portuguese _lobisomem_. Or an special epithet
> added to wolf to make it clear that it's one of those 'humanoid wolves',
> like French 'loup-garou' or Italian 'lupo mannaro'.
>
>> But if it is used in Vulgar Latin,
>
> It wasn't - you're compound is likely, given the scenario of your language.
>
>
As it happens _ulf(s)hamr_ and _vera í ulf(s)hami_ '(to be in)
wolfs-shape' is the more usual expression in Old Norse.
Indeed it seems _varulfr_ is not attested in ON! This may
or may not affect your decision WRT Þrjótrunn. Anyway it
clearly implies a man in wolf-shape rather than a wolf in man-shape.
===============================
I (BPJ) asked:
>> Might LUPONE be a possible formation?
>
And Ray replied:
> ?Vulgar Latin *lupone would presumably mean "wolflet', methinks.
I was thinking of the use of -ONE as an augmentative/deprecative.
>> I guess one might get
>> _lobóu_ from LUPU HOMO in R3, but how realistic would *that* be?
>
> One could imagine *luphomo (gen. *luphominis) - where |ph| = [p_h] -
> being formed as a calque of the Greek 'lykanthropos'. This would have
> given a Vulgar Latin *lupOmne
Since R3 has loss of *secondary* final single nasals
the nominative (H)OMO might end up as _-óu_, though
it is unlikely that the nominative would prevail.
But would [h] really be preserved long enough for
any *luphomine with [p_h] to arise in VL? After
all the even older and supposedly h-ful Romans
did not distinguish phi from pi in their borrowings.
> [snip]
>> assuming HOMINE > *omne > *omme > /uom/, provided that
>> M'N > mm *is* a realistic change for a Romance language
>
> It happened in Old French, i.e. (h)omme = 'man'
And apparently _nm > *mm_ too since ANIMA > Fr. _âme_,
with regressive assimilation, which is actually more
readily expectable than progressive assimilation of
_mn/m'n > *mm_ -- though I don't see where the circum-
flex in _âme_ comes from, since there never was any
/s/ in that word; perhaps there was a back nasal [A~]
in OF which denasalized to a back /A/ spelled _â_?
>> -- I want it to be but I'm not so sure! What's the track by which
>> HOMINE became _homme_ but HOMO became _on_ in French?
>
> The nom. (h)Omo --> /Om/ --> /0~/. The later was spelled _(h)om_ in Old
> French. But the sound /O~/ could equally well be spelled *(h)on, and
> when it became dissociated from _(h)omme_ and took on a new role as a
> pronoun, the simple spelling _on_ was adopted. *There never was a change
> /m/ --> /n/*
OK, and both *mn > *mm and *nm > *mm are attested changes, which
is well and good for me. Somehow _dom_ 'feels' better than _don_
for R3, and even though mb > m / _# R3 would otherwise end up
with very few words in final _-m_. In fact I have 'trouble'
with the first person plural of verbs, where I don't want to
lose _m_. I'm thinking that perhaps secondary final _-m_ was
lost before primary final _-s_, so that the _m_ in HABEMUS
wasn't final at the time the _m_ in POMUM or DECIMUM was lost.
So I'll have to have this order of changes:
(1) *abemos > *abems, *pomo > *pom
(2) *pom > po
(3) *abems > abem
and I'm not quite sure how realistic that is, especially
since I don't want words like SENSU > *sens to be affected
by (3). Would something like
(1') *pomo > pom
(2') *abemos > abemo
(3') *pom > po
(4') *abemo > abem
really be realistic? It feels very ad hoc...
>> And what's the story behind DOMINU > _Dom_ as an ecclesiatical
>> appellative (if that is the right word?)
>
> Used AFAIK principally by the Benedictine order.
>
In my ignorance I used 'ecclesiatical' in the general
sense of 'used by some ordained Catholics'. That may
be stylistically and/or terminologically wrong.
--
/BP 8^)
--
B.Philip Jonsson mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (delete X)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Truth, Sir, is a cow which will give [skeptics] no more milk,
and so they are gone to milk the bull."
-- Sam. Johnson (no rel. ;)
Messages in this topic (55)
________________________________________________________________________
8b. Re: Werewolf
Posted by: "caeruleancentaur" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:35 pm (PDT)
>In [email protected], Benct Philip Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>As it happens _ulf(s)hamr_ and _vera í ulf(s)hami_ '(to be in)
>wolfs-shape' is the more usual expression in Old Norse.
>Indeed it seems _varulfr_ is not attested in ON! This may
>or may not affect your decision WRT Þrjótrunn. Anyway it
>clearly implies a man in wolf-shape rather than a wolf in man-shape.
I was watching CSI last night (Las Vegas). The plot dealt with
adult twins (boy & girl) afflicted with hypertrichosis. They were
covered with hair.
Gil Grissom said the following: "Did you know that the
word 'werewolf' comes from the Old English 'worwolf' (spelling?)?
It meant serial killer."
Comments?
Charlie
Messages in this topic (55)
________________________________________________________________________
8c. Re: Werewolf
Posted by: "Henrik Theiling" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 2:22 pm (PDT)
Hi!
Benct Philip Jonsson writes:
>...
> As it happens _ulf(s)hamr_ and _vera í ulf(s)hami_ '(to be in)
> wolfs-shape' is the more usual expression in Old Norse. Indeed it
> seems _varulfr_ is not attested in ON! This may or may not affect
> your decision WRT Þrjótrunn. Anyway it clearly implies a man in
> wolf-shape rather than a wolf in man-shape.
>...
Hmhm. I could indeed think about borrowing or influence on compound
order. This is hard to decide, I don't know what could have happened.
I quite like my current 'hömnilupur'. But if you have hints that
'ulfshamr' was in frequent use when Latin came and if that lacked a
(colloquial) word for it at that time, then I think I should consider
an influence. Either a loan or structural influence,
e.g. '*lupiformis'?
**Henrik
Messages in this topic (55)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
9a. Re: Transcription exercise
Posted by: "Benct Philip Jonsson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:56 pm (PDT)
Paul Roser skrev:
> The number of languages that distinguish two voiceless lateral fricatives is
> quite small - off the top of my head, Bura, Cocopa, Northern Diegueno
> distinguish dental/alveolar and palatalized/palatal versions, Toda and
> A-hmao distinguish dental/alveolar and retroflex versions, and one of the
> Central Highland languages of Papua (Wahgi or Nii IIRC) has voiceless
> lateral fricative allophones of its *three* laterals - dental, alveolar,
> velar, but I think they only contrast word-finally.
So more symbols *would* be needed. I think the (ab)use of the
'lateral release' diacritic with fricative symbols might
be justified on the grounds that with non-occlusives
the lateral configuration would be expected to be present
throughout the sound.
>> But actually I'm beginning to have doubts about the
>> palatal(ized)/palatal lateral distinction. Perhaps
>> palatality in liquids should vary harmonically along with
>> palatality in vowels? (Even so I could have *[r_j] > /j/!)
>> OTOH if so shouldn't nasal palatality also vary harmonic-
>> ally, with /J/ in front harmony words corresponding to both
>> /n/ and /N/ of back harmony words; perhaps also front [j]
>> and [H] against back [G] and [w]. The closest analog from a
>> natlang that I know of is the variation between front /k g/
>> and back /X R/ of classigal Mongolian, but the idea as such
>> seems naturalistically plausible. There would be no phonemic
>> distinction between palatal and non-palatal lingual
>> sonorants, but there might still be a distinction in
>> spelling, since Heleb spelling is supposed to be a
>> rather clumsy adaptation of Classical Sohlob spelling
>> -- CS having phonemic /J j/ against /n N G/ since it
>> has no front harmony, but only height harmony.
>
> The closest thing I can think of the spreading of pharyngealization in some
> Caucasian languages - a pharyngealized uvular or vowel spreads
> pharyngealization to the rest of the word, though I don't know if anything
> blocks it. So I guess that's not the same as harmony of consonants triggered
> by front/back vowels...
>
I thought of the change in some Turkic languages whereby
palatal vowel harmony is replaced by palatal consonant
harmony -- i.e. rounded vowels in 'front' vords become
back, but the consonants of these 'front' words remain
palatalized before the formerly front vowels. I don't
know if it works the other way too so that palatal(ized)
consonants in 'back' words lose their palatality.
> --Bfowol
>
>
>
--
/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
"Maybe" is a strange word. When mum or dad says it
it means "yes", but when my big brothers say it it
means "no"!
(Philip Jonsson jr, age 7)
Messages in this topic (50)
________________________________________________________________________
9b. Re: Transcription exercise
Posted by: "Paul Roser" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:12 pm (PDT)
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 21:38:40 +0200, Benct Philip Jonsson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Paul Roser skrev:
>
>> The number of languages that distinguish two voiceless lateral fricatives is
>> quite small - off the top of my head, Bura, Cocopa, Northern Diegueno
>> distinguish dental/alveolar and palatalized/palatal versions, Toda and
>> A-hmao distinguish dental/alveolar and retroflex versions, and one of the
>> Central Highland languages of Papua (Wahgi or Nii IIRC) has voiceless
>> lateral fricative allophones of its *three* laterals - dental, alveolar,
>> velar, but I think they only contrast word-finally.
>
>So more symbols *would* be needed. I think the (ab)use of the
>'lateral release' diacritic with fricative symbols might
>be justified on the grounds that with non-occlusives
>the lateral configuration would be expected to be present
>throughout the sound.
The lateral release diacritic would be an acceptable stop-gap, but I think
that, for voiceless lateral fricatives at least, adding the 'belt' to a
lateral would be the best solution for IPA (and IIRC the ZBB X-Sampa has
symbols for lateral fricatives at just about every possible POA). Luciano
Canepari has designed a rather exhaustive expansion of the IPA (
(http://venus.unive.it/canipa/), and I think there is work afoot to get it
into the private-use section of Unicode and build a font for general release.
One thing he does that I rather like is dump the current IPA voiced lateral
fricative (that has evolved into an l+3 character) and replaces it with a
mirror image of the voicless lateral - so voiceless is belt on left, voiced
is belt on right - which is probably inconvenient for dyslexics, but works
fine for me. But then, I think that the IPA should have more symbols, rather
than less, and would like to see a number of additions made to the official
alphabet....
-Bfowol
Messages in this topic (50)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
10. FW: Call for papers on Vantage Theory on LINGUIST list
Posted by: "Yahya Abdal-Aziz" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:45 pm (PDT)
Hallo all,
I excerpt below the bulk of a message on the Linguist list
calling for papers for a conference seeking to extend
Vantage Theory, next July in Krakow. Apologies for this
partial cross-posting; however, I suspect few CONLANG
members follow LINGUIST closely.
There are a few points where the message touches on some
of the CONLANG list's recent concerns, particularly in:
- Colour categorisation;
- Subjectivity of meaning;
- Speaker agency, or the limits of speaker freedom;
- Linguistic relativity.
The message poses some interesting questions to ponder
when understanding how a (con)lang works, or fails to.
My own question for conlangers is this: Have any of you
found a use for Vantage Theory when designing a conlang?
Another question, more from curiosity: what are the limits
to the descriptor "Pragmatics" used below?
Regards,
Yahya
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Original message excerpts follow:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 15:48:32 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: 17.2718, Calls: [snip]; Pragmatics, Semantics/Poland
LINGUIST List: Vol-17-2718. Fri Sep 22 2006. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.
[snip]
-------------------------Message 2 ----------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 15:46:41
From: Adam Glaz < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Subject: Extensions of Vantage Theory: Points of View In Language Structure
and Use
Full Title: Extensions of Vantage Theory: Points of View In Language
Structure and Use
Short Title: 10th ICLC 2007: Vantage Theory
Date: 15-Jul-2007 - 20-Jul-2007
Location: Krakow, Poland
Contact Person: Adam Glaz
Meeting Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linguistic Field(s): Cognitive Science; Linguistic Theories; Pragmatics;
Semantics
Call Deadline: 03-Nov-2006
Meeting Description:
The session is devoted to linguistic applications of vantage theory (VT;
cf. http://klio.umcs.lublin.pl/~adglaz/vt.html), a cognition-based model of
(colour) categorization. VT has been shown to constitute a valuable
contribution to language studies. The present session will be devoted to
reviewing the VT-linguistics interface and, hopefully, extending the
application of VT onto previously unexplored areas. It will also deal with
more general issues addressed in the VT literature, such as subjectivity of
meaning, speaker agency and linguistic relativity, as well as posing new
questions in ways not anticipated by the convener.
The session is planned as a continuation and extension of an earlier event
at the 6th ICLC in Stockholm, 1999. That earlier session was devoted to
linguistic applications of vantage theory (VT), a cognition-based model of
(colour) categorization. It was convened and chaired by VT's founder, the
late Robert E. MacLaury, and the papers delivered appeared in print in a
special issue of Language Sciences (vol. 24, nos. 5-6, 2002). VT was shown
to constitute a valuable contribution to language studies. The present
session will be devoted to reviewing the VT-linguistics interface and,
hopefully, extending the application of VT onto previously unexplored areas.
VT holds that people categorize by drawing an instinctive and subconscious
analogy to the way they orient themselves in spacetime. A category is a sum
of the vantages taken on it, i.e. arrangements of fixed and mobile
cognitive coordinates, a vantage being a point of view. Fixed coordinates
vary depending on the domain, mobile coordinates are reciprocally balanced
degrees of attention to similarity and difference. Vantages and categories
arise as quickly as one can think and talk, the process playing a primary
role in language use. (More on VT at
http://klio.umcs.lublin.pl/~adglaz/vt.html).
The participants are invited to (i) offer proposals for solving problems at
the VT-linguistics interface or (ii) address the more general issues raised
by Robert MacLaury in relation to language.
As for (i), the list of questions includes but is by no means limited to
the following:
-What problems arise while applying VT to language? What
modifications/adaptations of the theory are called for?
-Which areas of linguistics are especially open to analyses couched within
the VT tradition? Which ones pose more problems?
-How to best understand a vantage? What analogues does it have in
language? Can one provide clear and unambiguous linguistic examples of the
dominant and recessive vantages? Can one preserve the terminology? What
relationship between vantages can be thought of (hierarchies, embedding,
other)? How does the notion of vantage relate to that of point of view?
-What other VT constructs figure as important in linguistic analyses?
The more general level (ii) embraces at least three interrelated issues,
potential springboards for discussion:
-Subjectivity of meaning. To what extent is meaning ''given'' by language
units and to what does it emerge out of the subject's interactions with the
world?
-Speaker agency. Within the bounds of their cognitive abilities
conceptualizers enjoy a considerable amount of leeway and are unconstrained
by language in any dramatic sense. But in what sense are they, if at all?
Where are the limits of the freedom?
-Linguistic relativity. VT stresses cultural and individual differences
between speakers. Do conceptualizations yield different results because of
the nature of the language spoken or regardless of it?
It is hoped that the session will also pose new questions in ways not
anticipated by its convener.
-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-17-2718
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.8/455 - Release Date: 22/9/06
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
