There are 15 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Quoting dialog
From: Mathieu Roy
1b. Re: Quoting dialog
From: Allison Swenson
1c. Re: Quoting dialog
From: George Corley
1d. Re: Quoting dialog
From: Jörg Rhiemeier
1e. Re: Quoting dialog
From: Allison Swenson
1f. Re: Quoting dialog
From: Gary Shannon
2a. Re: Natlang evolution (was RE: French spelling (was: logical languag
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
2b. Re: Natlang evolution (was RE: French spelling (was: logical languag
From: Armin Buch
2c. Re: Natlang evolution (was RE: French spelling (was: logical languag
From: Padraic Brown
3a. Re: Hypothetical situation (RE: logical language VS not-so-logical l
From: George Corley
3b. Re: Hypothetical situation (RE: logical language VS not-so-logical l
From: Padraic Brown
4.1. Re: So, about Ithkuil...
From: selpa'i
4.2. Re: So, about Ithkuil...
From: And Rosta
4.3. Re: So, about Ithkuil...
From: John Q
5a. Re: phonetic values of the 26-letter English alphabet
From: Leonardo Castro
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Quoting dialog
Posted by: "Mathieu Roy" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:47 am ((PST))
I like your idea. Another idea could be to use both. When a dialogue part of
a story start we use '«', and when in this part we want to make some
precision relating to the conversation (for example who's speaking or how
s/he's speaking), we use square brackets (open than close) '[' and ']'
instead of the quotation marks (close and open) '»' and '«'. Finally, when a
part of dialogue in the story is finished we use '»' and we are ready to
continue the description. For example:
As Lorquas Ptomel raised his eyes to address the prisoner they fell on me
and he turned to Tars Tarkas with a word, and gesture of impatience. Tars
Tarkas made some reply which I could not catch, but which caused Lorquas
Ptomel to smile; after which they paid no further attention to me.
« What is your name? [asked Lorquas Ptomel, addressing the prisoner.]
Dejah Thoris, daughter of Mors Kajak of Helium.
And the nature of your expedition? [he continued].
It was a purely scientific research party sent out by my father's father,
the Jeddak of Helium, to rechart the air currents, and to take atmospheric
density tests, [replied the fair prisoner, in a low, well-modulated voice.]
»
Then the description continue here....
-Mathieu
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Constructed Languages List [mailto:[email protected]] De la
part de Padraic Brown
Envoyé : lundi 21 janvier 2013 06:29
À : [email protected]
Objet : Re: Quoting dialog
--- On Sun, 1/20/13, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've been wondering about long stretches of non-dialog myself. My first
> thought was to indent dialog and non-dialog differently, or to have
> different margins, so that narrative text is full width and dialog text
> is in a narrower block, like the HTML "blockquote" tag.
>
> Here's a sample I threw together. I think it looks useable:
>
> http://fiziwig.com/conlang/quotes.html
Yes, though it looks like you've got three levels of indentation -- two
of them are used for quoted text (the third being flush with the left
margin), and that block that's separate doesn't seem to be visually
connected with what the prisoner has just said. Do I assume right that the
prisoner says both "It was a purely scientific" and "We were unprepared"?
Perhaps if "What is your name", "Dejah Thoris", etc are indented to the
same level as "We were unprepared" it might set off the quoted material a
little bit better?
Padraic
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Quoting dialog
Posted by: "Allison Swenson" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:53 am ((PST))
I actually just recently was looking into this for my conlang Tirina. I
finally decided on using parentheses to set off the quoted portions (e.g.,
She said, (Where are you going?)), with the idea that it was originally a
sort of cartouche encircling the entire quote that simplified into
parentheses. I'm still not sure how happy I am with it, but it'll do for
now.
Some examples based on Gary's text:
(What is your name?) asked Lorquas Ptomel, addressing the prisoner.
(Dejah Thoris, daughter of Mors Kajak of Helium)
(And the nature of your expedition?) he continued.
I'm not entirely certain what the requirements would be for how quotations
can be formed. In English, I can say:
He said, "Shall we find a place to eat?"
"Shall we," he said, "find a place to eat?"
"Shall we find a place to eat?" he said.
Or simply: He stood up. "Shall we find a place to eat?" (implying that he
said it)
Are all four of these forms found in all natlangs? Is there some other form
that English doesn't do? I tried doing some searching on the topic, but I
had some difficulty figuring out what to search for to get me examples of
dialogue in other languages. I don't think Tirina lends itself to the
second form (with the dialogue tag in the center of the quotation), and I'd
prefer to just disallow it.
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Quoting dialog
Posted by: "George Corley" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 7:20 am ((PST))
I have been rather quiet in this thread, but I thought I would just pipe in
with a simple opinion:
1) If you are talking about the romanization of your language, I would
highly suggest that you stick to the punctuation preferences of your target
audience (likely English speaking, but there are other considerations).
2) If your language is set in the real world and uses the Latin alphabet as
its native script or has a "real world" romanization -- consider its
history and what is done by its neighbors and/or ancestors.
3) If you are inventing a conscript, feel free to create whatever
punctuation you like, so long as it has proper rules and seems reasonably
natural. Also realize that you actually don't need punctuation at all. Or
spaces between words. Or majuscule vs miniscule forms. Many, MANY scripts
do just fine without some or all of those things.
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
1d. Re: Quoting dialog
Posted by: "Jörg Rhiemeier" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 7:21 am ((PST))
Hallo conlangers!
On Monday 21 January 2013 15:53:08 Allison Swenson wrote:
> I actually just recently was looking into this for my conlang Tirina. I
> finally decided on using parentheses to set off the quoted portions (e.g.,
> She said, (Where are you going?)), with the idea that it was originally a
> sort of cartouche encircling the entire quote that simplified into
> parentheses. I'm still not sure how happy I am with it, but it'll do for
> now.
>
> Some examples based on Gary's text:
>
> (What is your name?) asked Lorquas Ptomel, addressing the prisoner.
>
> (Dejah Thoris, daughter of Mors Kajak of Helium)
>
> (And the nature of your expedition?) he continued.
In Latin-transcribed Old Albic, I use "..."-quotes. The native
script of course has its own quote characters which look similar
to our square brackets.
--
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
"Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
1e. Re: Quoting dialog
Posted by: "Allison Swenson" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 7:59 am ((PST))
This is a good point. I could have made that more clear--in my case, the
use of parentheses would be for in the conscript, not necessarily in
translations (unless the translator wished to preserve the original flavor
for some reason?).
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:20 AM, George Corley <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have been rather quiet in this thread, but I thought I would just pipe in
> with a simple opinion:
>
> 1) If you are talking about the romanization of your language, I would
> highly suggest that you stick to the punctuation preferences of your target
> audience (likely English speaking, but there are other considerations).
> 2) If your language is set in the real world and uses the Latin alphabet as
> its native script or has a "real world" romanization -- consider its
> history and what is done by its neighbors and/or ancestors.
> 3) If you are inventing a conscript, feel free to create whatever
> punctuation you like, so long as it has proper rules and seems reasonably
> natural. Also realize that you actually don't need punctuation at all. Or
> spaces between words. Or majuscule vs miniscule forms. Many, MANY scripts
> do just fine without some or all of those things.
>
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
1f. Re: Quoting dialog
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:59 am ((PST))
Thank you. I like your idea too. I think I might put separate quotes
around each speaker, like this:
« What is your name? [asked Lorquas Ptomel, addressing the prisoner.] »
« Dejah Thoris, [she replied] daughter of Mors Kajak of Helium. »
« And the nature of your expedition? [he continued]. »
« It was a purely scientific research party sent out by my father's father,
the Jeddak of Helium, to rechart the air currents, and to take atmospheric
density tests, [replied the fair prisoner, in a low, well-modulated voice.] »
That way it would be clear when a _different_ person starts talking.
--gary
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:47 AM, Mathieu Roy <[email protected]> wrote:
> I like your idea. Another idea could be to use both. When a dialogue part of
> a story start we use '«', and when in this part we want to make some
> precision relating to the conversation (for example who's speaking or how
> s/he's speaking), we use square brackets (open than close) '[' and ']'
> instead of the quotation marks (close and open) '»' and '«'. Finally, when a
> part of dialogue in the story is finished we use '»' and we are ready to
> continue the description.
---snip---
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Natlang evolution (was RE: French spelling (was: logical languag
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:59 am ((PST))
On 21 January 2013 12:44, Mathieu Roy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Do you think French will or should go into such a reform in the next 50
> years since its writing part and speaking part diverge quite a lot? Why or
> why not?
>
>
French *has* already undergone such a reform in the 1990's. It didn't go as
far as "1 letter - 1 sound", but it tried to get rid of illogical
spellings, wrong etymologies, and simplify the use of accents. The backlash
from the population was so harsh the Academy had to allow both the old
spelling and the new spelling to be used in parallel, as parents were
actively moving their children from one school that taught the new spelling
to another that didn't to ensure they wouldn't learn the new spelling.
Spelling is important to French people :) .
Nevertheless, nowadays people have started adopting some conventions of the
new spelling anyway. The backlash was more due to a lack of communication
and a reform that went too quickly rather than people actually being
against the new spellings. The fact that some parts of the reform looked
like common spelling mistakes also made people feel like the new spelling
was about letting everyone write in any way they would like, which was
unacceptable.
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: Natlang evolution (was RE: French spelling (was: logical languag
Posted by: "Armin Buch" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:29 am ((PST))
On 21.01.2013 12:59, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets wrote:
> The backlash
from the population was so harsh the Academy had to allow both the old
spelling and the new spelling to be used in parallel
[...]
> The fact that some parts of the reform looked
> like common spelling mistakes also made people feel like the new spelling
> was about letting everyone write in any way they would like, which was
> unacceptable.
>
Seems to me this was just the effect it must have had. At least the
German 1990's orthography reform with its several back-and-forth
modifications has created a situation in which several spellings are
possible for many words, and even educated people do not know what the
rules are today (i.e. which of the reformed spellings have been revoked
and which not).
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
2c. Re: Natlang evolution (was RE: French spelling (was: logical languag
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 7:20 am ((PST))
[The following message is written on a CG scale of 1, i.e., no satire or
other potentially mistakable content and will cause him no further
constipation.]
--- On Mon, 1/21/13, George Corley <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is so false that it sounds like satire.
Yes indeed! Got it in one.
> > For example, were I such a Central Planner
>
> Do spelling reforms have to come from a despotic "Central
> Planner"?
"Reforms" I think probably do. Ordinary people are certainly capable of
doing whatever they like. Just look at all the text messages that have a
completely different spelling system as compared to an ordinary email or
written text. A quick look at some common conventions shows a sort of
return to vowelless writing as well as some use of numerical rebuses or
symbological writing and heavy use of abbreviations and acronyms.
None of this came from a central planner, to be sure, but neither is it
a "reform". It's simply a natural evolution specific to a particular
written medium. Put a device like a cell phone in enough people's hands
and they'll come up with an easy way to communicate with it. But I
wouldn't call Textlish a "reform" of any kind.
You mentioned that printers and dictionary writers standardiz/sed the
spelling -- sure, that's a natural consequence of the business. It didn't
come from any kind of language board or governmental authority or
Academy. These kinds of changes are much more organic and democratic.
> Webster's reforms caught on in the US because his
> dictionary sold well.
> Many languages have undergone reforms due to independant
> action of
> intellectuals and writers which were only later officially
> supported. Even
> the Chinese Communist Party, when it created simplified
> characters, drew
> from existing calligraphic forms and shorthand that was
> already in use. If
> such a strictly authoritarian system can draw from the
> existing culture
> when making reforms, certainly small reforms occuring in the
> populace can bubble up in a democratic system.
I don't see any problem with this at all! As a matter of fact, I was
thinking largely of these fictitious central planners drawing heavily on
Textlish and other modern net-based jargons for their reforms.
I guess it's more a matter of definition. I see "reform" as more of a top
down and official process, where decisions are made and executed and
enforced; while ordinary language change, such as we all know languages
undergo all the time, is a bottom up process -- whether it's yokels out in
the bush or intellectuals in the cultural centers generating the change,
the change is organic and non-directed!
--- Mathieu Roy wrote:
> I call Poe's law. ;) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law)
Hadn't heard of that one! Good one to know. I'm certainly aware of the
shortcomings of the text only medium; but sometimes a good bit of satire
or fiction is just ruined all to hell with a plethora of warning labels
and needless consumer advisories.
--- Christophe Grandsire wrote:
> No. I will always call out nonsense when I see it. If you don't like it,
> that's *your* problem. Stop spouting nonsense then.
I shall continue to spout whatever nonsense I damn well please, sir, and
whenever the spirit move me so to do!
> If you were not being serious, there was *absolutely no way to see that
> in your mail*.
Humor not always marked. Deal with it.
> On the contrary, it was very much in line with the ultra-conservative
> opinions you've shown time and again on the list.
I very much doubt you can name five "ultra-conservative" opinions that I
hold. I don't ever recall inviting you into the voting booth with me, nor
have I ever discussed my own views on those matters with you. I can only
guess at the things that stick in your craw, though would caution against
falling for the assumption that whatever constitutes discussions about
creative matters or fictional realities must be identical to views held
about real world issues.
> This is email: there's no way to see if you're winking!
Indeed not. And it is not a requirement that I must wink at you every
damn time I write a message here.
> As George's message shows, I'm not the only one who took what you wrote
> seriously. So maybe the problem is not on my side but rather on yours.
And George instantly got that it is satire. One would think that after ten
or more years of writing such things, you'd get it by now. Guess not! I
freely admit my own faults, Mr Perfection, so I thank you very much for
pointing out the speck in my eye. Yet again. Guess if you can't deal,
well, as they say, al fe rout ou.
Padraic
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Hypothetical situation (RE: logical language VS not-so-logical l
Posted by: "George Corley" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:41 am ((PST))
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:29 AM, Mathieu Roy <[email protected]>wrote:
> Christophe: << easy to learn" for languages boils down to one thing, and
> one
> thing only: *familiarity*>>
> I have read "Why Chinese Is So Damn Hard"
> (http://pinyin.info/readings/texts/moser.html) and I agree with this
> essay.
> My hypothesis is that it would be easier for Chineses to learn a language
> with an alphabet than another one with different symbols for each concept.
> Is their Chineses on the list that can approve or disapprove this? Anyway,
> I
> agree that familiarity has a lot to do with the easiness of learning, but I
> don't think it's the absolute only thing. Moreover, in creating a spoken
> language from a signing language, the phonology will have to be created
> based on no previous languages, so the concept of familiarity does apply
> for
> that, but I don't think that means that all possible phonology these people
> can chose will be equally learnable.
>
It would probably be easier to learn *to read* Chinese if it used an
alphabetic script, but that doesn't affect how easy or hard it is to learn
to speak. Reading and writing are different skill from speaking and
listening.
I do see your point, however, on how switching modalities would cause some
problems in learning a new language. Would these hypothetical ASL-only
humans have difficulty with a spoken language? I don't know. To some
extent, I think it may be a moot point -- hearing humans who only speak a
sign language is highly unlikely. In fact, considering that I have only
heard of sign languages arising where there are significant numbers of Deaf
individuals, it may well be that humans default to using spoken languages
when possible, probably because of the inherent advantages of auditory
communication (you don't have to be facing the speaker, for example -- and
it can be understood over longer distances).
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Hypothetical situation (RE: logical language VS not-so-logical l
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:26 am ((PST))
--- On Mon, 1/21/13, Mathieu Roy <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Question: are all 1000 people in on the project, or is there just a
> > small cadre of conlangers in on it?
>
> I don't know. What do you think most humans would prefer? What do you
> think would work best?
Well, I ask simply because the vast majority of the human population is
not composed of conlangers. If the scenario takes a thousand random
people, you might end up with somewhere between 0 and 2 conlangers, and
it is possible that somewhere between 0 and 2 of them will be closet
conlangers (I think there are probably more conlangers in the world than
subscribe to Conlang or ZBB or the other big groups.)
If all 1000 of the people are conlangers, I could easily see the project
degenerating into kitchen sinkery (where, by nature, we try to put too
much stuff into the language); or else we take 25 days to sort out the
phonology and then realise that we've got no time left to actually devise
the language before we all go blind!
I don't think there is a "best". I think that, for purposes of the
experiment, you just pick one or the other and work from there.
> > I get from Mathieu's scenario that everyone has the capacity to talk,
> > but no one uses that modality to communicate. Most people will
> > probably not even be aware that they can talk with their mouths and
> > see with ears!
>
> Exactly. It's like a children (or anyone) that have never "heard" of a
> signing language and sees one for the first time.
Right. While I'm sure it's unlikely and even improbable, it's still an
interesting idea.
> > There are plenty of things that are just not realistic in this thought
> > experiment.
>
> I think my situation is extremely improbable, but not physically
> impossible.
Right. It's not like crazy situations of this sort haven't been done in SF
before. I think the point isn't so much to run a realistic model as to
come up with a novel way of telling the old "how do people in common
straits come together for survival and mutual aid" story.
Plus you get to tinker with language and related issues!
Padraic
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4.1. Re: So, about Ithkuil...
Posted by: "selpa'i" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:01 am ((PST))
There is one thing that really confuses me.
The slots of a formative are named "Cr" or "Ca" or "Vr" etc. I read "Cr"
to mean "any consonant followed by the letter r" and "Ca" as "any
consonant followed by the vowel a" and "Vr" as "any vowel followed by
r". But ... it can't be. You list "p_h" (aspirated p) as the root for
"branched/leaved plant", and roots fill the "Cr" slot, but there is no r
anywhere to be seen! Similarly, I am extremely confused where the "-l"
ending comes from in p_hal "tree". The Ca slot should end in the vowel
"a", but it doesn't. This type of confusion continues throughout all the
slots...
I'm am clearly missing something very important here. Could you please
enlighten me?
mu'o mi'e la selpa'i
Messages in this topic (27)
________________________________________________________________________
4.2. Re: So, about Ithkuil...
Posted by: "And Rosta" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:01 am ((PST))
selpa'i, On 20/01/2013 18:44:
> While I probably agree with the distintion, you, or And Rosta are
> making, I think it's also worth noting that English is not being used
> to its full potential by anyone either. It's impossible. As soon as a
> certain amount of nesting starts to happen, both the speaker and the
> listener lose track of what's going on. Are they not speaking
> English? I think they are.
Yes. I said the same in the Fith discussion.
Alex Fink, On 21/01/2013 10:10:
> To the extent Ithkuil is an experiment in whether it's possible for a
> speaker to learn all its categories fluently, the _means_ of their
> expression seems to me to introduce a horrible confound. I dare say
> that, even given a set of categories which I could deploy with
> complete fluency in my native language, I'd never be able to master
> such a fusional expression of them as is found in e.g. tables
> 5(a)--(l) of http://www.ithkuil.net/03_morphology.html ! There are
> various local similarities of nearby values in that table, but
> globally it has nothing like a pattern (that I can discern). The
> situation has been improved since the first revision of Ithkuil, but
> I would've probably still gone much further -- make every non-uniplex
> configuration some nonzero affix, every non-delimitative extension
> some non-zero affix, etcetera, then string the whole lot together
> agglutinatively, and just bear the blow to compactness.
The most special bit of Ithkuil is the Content half (i.e. syntactic
(semantically interpreted) form and its semantic substance). The Expression
half (i.e. phonological (phonetically interpreted) form and its phonetic
substance) is simply driven by the goal of compactness, overriding
considerations of speakability and learnability.
I think it could make sense for real-world would-be Ithkuil-users to do the
following:
(1) Devise a nonphonological "algebraic" (e.g. Geek-code-like) notation for
Ithkuil Content.
(2a) Devise an ergonomic phonology
(2b) Devise an ergonomic morphology (e.g. taking into account learnability as
well as compactness)
(2c) Define rules for translating (2b) into (1) (and vice versa)
(2c) would ensure the result was a true version of Ithkuil, but (2a-b) would
make it more usable.
A different but related point: I've turned over in my mind the idea of devising
a derviational morphological system in Livagian that takes the Content of
Ithkuil words and gives them morphological expression in Livagian, while
preserving Livagian syntax and inflectional morphology. I doubt I'll ever
implement the idea, but I like the idea that in principle the Livagian lexicon
could have the expressive power of Ithkuil (by virtue of having incorporated
Ithkuil's map of semantic space).
--And.
Messages in this topic (27)
________________________________________________________________________
4.3. Re: So, about Ithkuil...
Posted by: "John Q" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:37 am ((PST))
Selpa'i wrote:
>The slots of a formative are named "Cr" or "Ca" or "Vr" etc. I read "Cr"
>to mean "any consonant followed by the letter r" and "Ca" as "any
>consonant followed by the vowel a" and "Vr" as "any vowel followed by
>r". But ... it can't be. You list "p_h" (aspirated p) as the root for
>"branched/leaved plant", and roots fill the "Cr" slot, but there is no r
>anywhere to be seen! Similarly, I am extremely confused where the "-l"
>ending comes from in p_hal "tree". The Ca slot should end in the vowel
>"a", but it doesn't. This type of confusion continues throughout all the
>slots...
>
>I'm am clearly missing something very important here. Could you please
>enlighten me?
>
>mu'o mi'e la selpa'i
____________________________________________________
The terms Cr, Ca, Vr, etcetera, are merely terms in a formula like in algebra.
The letters "r", "a", etc. should actually expressed as subscripts to make it
more clear they're just forumulaic terms (but I got lazy doing my HTML to turn
them into subscripts). So "Cr" does not mean "any consonant followed by the
consonant r" but rather "the root consonsantal form" which can be, for example,
-p- or -ks- or -fkl- or -mstw-, etc. "Vr" means the vowel associated with the
root" and can be forms like -a- or -ei- or -io-, etc. The term "Ca" is
completely arbitrary and simply means the consonantal form that goes in Slot X
of an Ithkuil formative and carries five morphemes (configuration, affiliation,
perspective, extension, and essence), with forms as simple as -p- or -f- all
the way to forms such as -rthw-.
--John Q.
Messages in this topic (27)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. Re: phonetic values of the 26-letter English alphabet
Posted by: "Leonardo Castro" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:42 am ((PST))
2013/1/20 Jörg Rhiemeier <[email protected]>:
> Hallo conlangers!
>
> On Sunday 20 January 2013 04:20:12 Herman Miller wrote:
>
>> [...]
>> j = Ê isn't all that unusual,
>
> French does it.
Portuguese too.
Messages in this topic (6)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
[email protected]
[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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
