There are 15 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Hello, and language sketch.
From: Aodhán Aannestad
1b. Re: Hello, and language sketch.
From: Padraic Brown
2.1. META: Conlang-L FAQ
From: Henrik Theiling
3a. Re: Mood and author opinion
From: Leonardo Castro
3b. Re: Mood and author opinion
From: George Corley
4a. Re: Animal Noises?
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
4b. Re: Animal Noises?
From: Garth Wallace
5.1. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
5.2. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
From: George Corley
5.3. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
5.4. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
From: George Corley
5.5. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
5.6. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
From: George Corley
5.7. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
From: Roger Mills
6a. Re: Conlang punctuation.
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Hello, and language sketch.
Posted by: "Aodhán Aannestad" tolkien_fr...@aannestad.com
Date: Sun Jun 30, 2013 3:57 pm ((PDT))
On 6/30/2013 12:57 AM, Alex Fink wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 23:28:43 -0500, Aodhán Aannestad
> <tolkien_fr...@aannestad.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello! I'm a longtime lurker, finally deciding to get involved a little.
>> Some of you may have met me at the last LCC, I'm with UT Austin's
>> conlang club and I drove some people around.
> 'Twas good to meet / bum rides off you there.
>
>> Anyway, on to the language. It doesn't have a name yet, sadly - I'm
>> using it for a protolang for a large project, and since said large
>> project has yet to really begin, it's not really in a state where I can
>> really name anything. (I suppose I could come up with an endonym for it
>> - it'd be something like 'Lesuy' (/lesuj/, /person-speak/) or something,
>> though that doesn't sound that great to my ears.)
> Eh, I'm in no rush to give my projects endonyms; I give them codenames or
> descriptive English names until then. And anyway, endonyms are often
> non-transparently formed, especially in areas with lots of cross-cultural
> interaction, in deriving from place names or tribal names or calqued or
> borrowed exonyms or whatnot; so if you don't like /lesuj/ it's hardly forced
> on you.
Yeah, that was my reasoning behind not bothering yet. It'll have one
eventually.
>> Affixes have no
>> shape target - anything from V to a maximal syllable is in theory
>> permitted.
> This is kinda odd, unless the affixing is all really new. (I suppose that
> what I'm calling "really new" could actually èxternally be "well, I have to
> start sòmewhere with a pre*-proto-language to have something to run
> diachronics on").
That's about where it stands at the moment :P
>
> What's the realisation of stress? If unstressed syllables are weakerly
> articulated in whatever way, then weaker syllables could start to lose some
> of the complexity of their syllable structure (especially monophthongisation,
> but also cluster simplification &c), which could help set up a more canonical
> affix shape down the line, and as a bonus potentially yield fun
> morphophonology.
I'd only really thought about unstressed syllables having reduced
vowels, but I very much like this idea - somehow reducing unstressed
syllables (or at least affixes) down to simply CV or CVC max. Stress is
right-oriented, though, which could serve to create some weird
irregularities.
I'm honestly a bit worried about having extremely unpredictable
morphophonology, but we'll see what happens. Hopefully I can figure out
some nice ways to level things out.
>> any sequences of two identical vowels
>> are shrunk into one (e.g. /emnira/, 'girl', from /emni/ 'woman' + /ira/
>> 'child'). /i/ and /u/ become glides when adjacent to other vowels (e.g.
>> /dorayra/ 'boy', from /dora /'man' + /ira/).
> To ask after pedantic completeness: what happens when two different nonhigh
> vowels meet? When an /i/ and a /u/ meet, which one glides?
Onglides are preferred over offglides, so whichever one's first (/ui/ >
[wi], /iu/ > [ju])
>
>> Word order is VSO when there's no
>> overt complementiser, and SOV when there is (so /fikol le/ 'the man has
>> gone', but /le/ /fikolti/ 'the fact that the man has gone').
> The /-ti/ is the overt complementiser in there?
Yeah.
>
>> Verbs don't care about person, number, or tense, but there are 5 or 7
>> aspect markers (perfective/stative (null-marked), progressive, perfect,
>> expective, intentive(?), and hortative and imperative if you count them
>> - they're mutually exclusive with aspect).
> Does whether the null-marked aspect is perfective or stative depend on like
> Aktionsart or some kind of inherent aspect of the verb, or is there something
> weirder going on here? And then, if there are verb classes, are there any
> interesting semantic properties of the marked aspects? e.g. often (afaik)
> inherently stative verbs automatically become inceptives or whatnot when used
> in a (marked) perfective.
Verbs are inherently either static or dynamic, and aspects tend to
change what they imply with each class - so progressive with dynamics is
progressive (i.e. ongoing action), but with statics it means that the
state is temporary; perfect with dynamics is perfect (i.e. completed
action), but with statics it's basically just past tense (i.e. the state
is no longer the case), etc. Null-marked dynamics are
perfective/inceptive, but null-marked statics are stative (though either
can be gnomic, and null-marked dynamics can be habitual also).
>
>> The only obligatory marking on nouns is case, but there's a number of
>> other potential affixes. Number is especially complex -
> Does the below imply that plain old number marking of the singular vs. plural
> sort, lacking specificity in the quantity and lacking a larger quantity of
> which it's a part, is not found?
Yeah, at least as things stand at the moment - if you don't know or
don't care how many, you just leave it unmarked. Multiples of 4 and 8
are also often used for estimates (c.f. English 'there's a hundred
people here' when there's really 118).
>
>> specific
>> quantities are marked directly on the noun (so/lemofyethon/ 'twenty
>> people', it's base-8 so that breaks down as /le-mo-fye-thon/
>> 'person-8-2-4' for (2*8)+4 people), and there are also suffixes for
>> 'more than half (of a group)', 'less than half (of a group)',
> Really so specifically 'more / less than half', as opposed to 'relatively
> many (of a group)', 'relatively few (of a group)'? That precision seems
> unlikely to me.
Yeah, it's a bit more fuzzy than that - the idea is 'most' vs. 'a few'.
>
>> 'part (of
>> a unit)', and 'all (of a unit)'. These can be augmented by 'all' or
>> 'none', and further by 'the next' or 'the previous' (allowing for very
>> long sequences such as /lemofyethondawfag /'none of the last twenty
>> people').
> Very long single words arising from numbers seem to me to be one of those
> things which conlangers are prone to do but natlangs aren't. I don't know
> any direct data. But one natlang that hàs done this for two digit numbers is
> Hindi, and the result is that in the modern form all kinds of sandhi goes on
> and the system is kinda tricky to learn.
> https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Hindi/Numbers
> But not many languages have a Hindi-type system. And effects of analogy
> notwithstanding, my feeling is that this probably means that systems of
> two-digit numbers mostly don't behave like single words cross-linguistically.
>
> Information density is probably not a very good way to get at questions of
> synchronic wordhood, but it is at least true that grammaticalisation,
> including univerbation, is characteristic of regions of relatively lower
> information density, whereas spelling out the digits of a long number in
> which precision is important intrinsically has relatively high information
> density. Maybe a more relevant fact is the way people reading telephone
> numbers and the like tend to give them structureful and nonhomogeneous
> prosody.
So hm - would a numerical classifiers system like
Japanese/Chinese/Korean work better for this language, do you think? I
know for Old Japanese's version of the Japanese native counting system
you had to jump through hoops to specify values between tens (e.g.
mis@ka 'thirty days', mis@ka (a)mari k@k@n@ka 'thirty-nine days', lit.
'thirty days remainder nine days') - would you expect something with a
similar structure to occur here?
>
>> there's two kinds of
>> genitives, possessive and categorical (for things like 'men of that
>> village', 'the strength of an ox', 'a sword of bronze' and so on), both
>> of which form verbs (so//'the man's cat' has to be /lenase nyawa/ with
>> -/se/, not */lena nyawa/ - /lena nyawa /is grammatical, but it would be
>> heard as 'the cat is the man's').
> This is funny. Leaving aside the use of the label "case", what we have here
> are two operations which build verbs on nouns.
> Now, ttbomk, it is a strong tendency that derivational or compounding
> operations tend to impose indefinite / nonspecific / nonreferential
> interpretations on their bases. For example, take Mithun's hierarchy of
> types of noun incorporation (e.g.
> <www.stanford.edu/~tylers/notes/morphosyntax/Mithun_1984_notes.pdf>): the
> more straightforward types I (and II?) tend to name "unitary activities",
> like 'birdwatching'; "as you have a unitary activity, the N loses its
> salience (Mithun 1984: 849)"; the way the other types III and IV develop on
> this is by running with this nonsalience.
> On the other hand, possessives at least are most prototypically used with
> completely definite referential nouns, like SAP pronouns and proper names and
> stuff; this is totally the opposite of what derivational etc. operations tend
> to do. Funny. (For the categorical, it doesn't seem so bad to me.)
>
> Of course, if you were to have these verbs, their relativised uses for usual
> noun-modifying-a-noun relations is perfectly natural.
>
> Ah, hm, maybe this isn't a problem if these "cases" are regarded as _clitic_
> verbs, which just can't occur phonologically free and have to lean on a noun
> to their left for whatever reason. The copular /-si/ might then permit the
> same analysis. I suppose that if you don't go with this cliticky kind of
> thing, the same nonspecificity motivations might motivate a language like
> this to keep /-si/ for membership in a class ('Gilbert is a farmer') and use
> a different mechanism for identity ('the morning star is the evening star',
> 'the murderer is the butler').
The clitic analysis seems to make sense (and it seems to work
structurally, too, at least if I'm remembering right the syntax trees I
drew ages ago). That is a direction for diachronic change, though -
innovating a separate copular word for use with identity and merging the
clitic copula with the categorical (which is already phonetically
similar enough that that could happen through sound change alone).
>
>
>> Locative cases are the following: inessive and exessive (both used for
>> general locatives, inessive for being within the boundaries of a place,
>> exessive for being near but outside the boundaries of a place or
>> object), superessive and subessive, proessive ('in front of') and
>> postessive ('behind'), comitative, allative (also used as a dative) and
>> ablative (also used as the agent of causatives and volitives), illative
>> and ellative, superlative ('going over') and sublative ('going under'),
>> circumlative/circumessive, and adspective ('facing') and abspective
>> ('facing away from').
> Hm, no "general" locative then. That isn't itself weird, but what would be
> weird is if the system were actually as tidy as presented here; for whatever
> reason, systems of oblique cases and adpositions seem to be very fertile
> grounds for subregularities and not-very-productive metaphors and other
> slightly odd usages to become collocatively fixed.
>
> What happens in your language with metaphorical uses of the locative cases --
> how do the speakers apply these distinctions of whether things are inessively
> or exessively etc. "in" a condition or a situation, or a time, or a language,
> or so forth?
I'm sure there's a lot of depth here I haven't yet plumbed (especially
considering this ís an idealised pre-proto-language) - I probably
haven't done enough testing either to come up with good situations for
things like this. At the moment, I'm assuming that general descriptions
are almost always correct (e.g. something during an event would be
inessive, because it's within the boundaries of the event; but
something around the time of an event would be exessive, because it's
not, etc.).
>> Non-locative cases are benefactive (also used for the experiencer with a
>> number of perception verbs - 'see' for example has a BEN subject when
>> you would expect ERG, and giving it an ERG subject changes the meaning
>> to 'look at'),
> Good.
>
>> instrumental, causative, and comparative.
> Comparative for standards of comparison, or something wackier? And what does
> causative case do?
I'm still working through what the comparative should look like, and I'm
leaning towards a combination of standard-of-comparison and what I
understand 'essive' to mean (though I'm probably wrong - my
understanding is that essive is 'as' in sentences like 'I'm playing [a
strategy game] as France' or whatever'. This does require separate
comparative morphology on the verb (since when the verb's marked
comparative, the case would be interpreted as English 'than'; but when
the verb's not marked, it'd be interpreted as 'as' or maybe 'like'), and
it might be easier to do it where comparison isn't marked on the verb
and you just have to use the case marker (something like how Japanese
yori is used).
Causative is for reasons (something like 'because of'), but it may be
unnecessary - it looks just the same as the bare verb nominaliser
(/adverbialiser) that also marks cause. Either that or the bare verb
nominaliser should be dropped and verbs should need a normal nominaliser
for this (especially since purpose is NOM+BEN - cause might ought to be
NOM+CAUS instead of just CAUS as a nominaliser).
>
>> Copular constructions are formed by affixing the copular verbaliser
>> /-si/ to nouns - /dorasi le/ 'the person is a man'. This allows for a
>> somewhat idiosyncratic way to express motion - while it's perfectly
>> grammatical to say /fyokh ne sakhtasoy /(/go-PROG 1-ABS river-ALL,
>> /literally 'I am going to the river'), it's much more native-sounding to
>> say /sakhtasoysi ne/ (/river-ALL-COP 1-ABS, /literally 'I am to the river').
> I wonder what the pragmatic effects of using the 'go' verb are, then. (Hm,
> maybe it foregrounds manner, and the verb you've glossed 'go' is instead more
> like 'walk'? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verb_framing)
The verb is especially useful when leaving destination and direction
unspecified, though it pretty much ends up meaning 'leave' in cases like
that. More often than not, though, case+COP constructions refer to
someone or something being still in transit, and so the verb is required
when referring to a whole motion action.
A good example of the contrast might be:
fi-sif le-Ø sakhta-soy alla-ki
go-WEAKEXPECT person-ABS river-ALL day-FARDEM
'I bet he'll go to the river that day' - implying that he will set out
and arrive on the same day (so the river must be within a day's journey
of his starting location)
vs.
sahkta-soy-si-sif le-Ø alla-ki
river-ALL-COP-WEAKEXPECT person-ABS day-FARDEM
'I bet he'll be on his way to the river that day' - implying that his
journey is at least more than one day long, probably ending on a
different day than the one in question (though possibly still starting
on the same day); and pragmatically implying that some other action that
is occuring on that day besides simply journeying is the overall topic
of conversation - either he's doing something on the way, or someone
else is establishing a relative chronology of disparate events in their
head.
I imagine that if the people who spoke this had cellphones, they'd use
the case+COP construction when talking about whatever transit the phone
call is being made during.
This language is very much more satellite-framing most of the time,
since you can productively use case endings on verb roots to make
compound verbs (so you can have go+ABL = 'leave', go+SUPERESS = 'ride', etc)
>
>> There are also two generic verbs, meaning something like 'to do (it)'
>> and 'to go (there)'. They can also be used as nominalisers (somewhat
>> ironically :P), meaning 'method' and 'process', respectively.
> Neat, though I'm not entìrely sure what the difference between 'method' and
> 'process' to you is. Zero-derivation of verbs to nouns isn't a thing that
> happens in general, then, I take it?
Those probably aren't the best terms, and it is pretty fuzzy. 'Do' is
more used with the mental conception of an action (e.g. when there's
multiple ways to do an action that all lead to largely the same result,
'do' is used to refer to those ways), and 'go' is more used with the
actual realisation of an action (e.g. it refers to not how something is
done, but the fact that it is being done).
Zero-derivation is pretty unusual. One of the few cases where it can is
when applying case endings to verbs (as a lexical derivation process),
in which case the output can be either a noun or a verb.
>> I've got a few ideas on where to go with it from here, but
>> if anyone has any ideas I'd be happy to hear them.
> Well, what are your ideas? Anyway, I find the brainstorming easier if you
> give us a bit of text to chew on, so we can see what kind of structures are
> asking for reduction or reinterpretation of some sort. (The interlinearised
> sentences in your next message are a good start! I'll have to read them
> later than right now, though, I'm already up too long.)
One of the things I'm thinking about is a process involving
demonstrative affixes, where something like this happens:
near demonstrative > topic marker > fossilised pronoun marker (e.g.
person+NEARDEM becomes 3.ANIM, and the affix ceases to be productive)
far demonstrative > (contrastive) focus marker > ??
And of course there's always the basic sound change stuff (especially
things like final consonant loss and cluster simplification, since one
of the daugher languages is planned to be straight-up CV). I may have
one branch delete unstressed high vowels and have clicks pop out of any
resulting prevelar stop(/nasal?) + velar stop clusters (e.g. [pi'kat] >
[pkat] > [O\at]).
>
> Alex, row row rowing
>
Thanks for the input! You've given me a lot to think about.
Messages in this topic (11)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Hello, and language sketch.
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Sun Jun 30, 2013 4:40 pm ((PDT))
> From: Aodhán Aannestad <tolkien_fr...@aannestad.com>
>
>> What's the realisation of stress? If unstressed syllables are weakerly
>> articulated in whatever way, then weaker
>> syllables could start to lose some of the complexity of their syllable
>> structure (especially monophthongisation, but
>> also cluster simplification &c), which could help set up a more canonical
>> affix shape down the line, and as a
>> bonus potentially yield fun morphophonology.
>
> I'd only really thought about unstressed syllables having reduced
> vowels, but I very much like this idea - somehow reducing unstressed
> syllables (or at least affixes) down to simply CV or CVC max. Stress is
> right-oriented, though, which could serve to create some weird
> irregularities.
>
> I'm honestly a bit worried about having extremely unpredictable
> morphophonology, but we'll see what happens. Hopefully I can figure out
> some nice ways to level things out.
Well, it's axiomatic that, at least for human languages, they are always in a
state of flux.
You've already said that what you're working on is a sort of proto-language;
just look
on what you're doing now as observing the language at a particularly bumpy
period in
its evolution. So, sit up, strap yourself in and enjoy all the twists and turns!
>>> The only obligatory marking on nouns is case, but there's a number of
>>> other potential affixes. Number is especially complex - specific
>>> quantities are marked directly on the noun (so/lemofyethon/ 'twenty
>>> people', it's base-8 so that breaks down as /le-mo-fye-thon/
>>> 'person-8-2-4' for (2*8)+4 people), and there are also suffixes for
>>> 'more than half (of a group)', 'less than half (of a group)',
>
>> Really so specifically 'more / less than half', as opposed to 'relatively
>> many (of a group)',
>> 'relatively few (of a group)'? That precision seems unlikely to me.
>
> Yeah, it's a bit more fuzzy than that - the idea is 'most' vs. 'a few'.
I like the idea of associating specific numbers with nouns. I would ask are
these numbers
supposed to represent a real / assumed / guessed at quantity, or are we looking
at
certain numbers that, for whatever social reason, get associated with nouns?
I'm put in
mind of the Old Irish convention of the "thrice fifty" maidens or lads that
always seem to
accompany a principal character: "The Dagda meanwhile brought his son to
Midir's house
in Brí Léith in
Tethba, to be fostered. There Aengus was reared for the space of nine
years.
Midir had a great playing-field in Brí Léith. Thrice fifty lads
of the young nobles of Ireland
were there and thrice fifty maidens of
the land of Ireland..."
I have no doubt at all but that "thrice fifty maidens" simply means "some
largeish quantity
of youngish girls"; and perhaps the "space of nine years" likewise simply means
"a few
years". In other words, the numbers are poetic conventions rather than actual
quantities.
I've done this sort of thing a time or two in some conlangs and wondered if a
similar thing
weren't going on here.
I also réally like the idea for specific suffixes meaning "more than half /
less than half" of
a group. I could easily see this sort of thing arising among a people who
probably live
in smallish groups and are very aware of the presence or absence or location of
the
others in the group. I could also see another set of "relatively many /
relatively few"
and "many / few" suffixes for when the groups become out of hand. Perhaps, for
example, during festivals when many people get together from many different
lands
around and no one can know who all is present or which side of half the group is
really there. Dunno how líkely the scheme is, but I do like it!
[resto snippato]
Padraic
Messages in this topic (11)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2.1. META: Conlang-L FAQ
Posted by: "Henrik Theiling" h...@theiling.de
Date: Sun Jun 30, 2013 8:05 pm ((PDT))
The following is the de facto Conlang-L FAQ, hosted at:
http://wiki.frath.net/Conlang-L_FAQ
This is automatically posted once a month, copied directly from that page,
for the benefit of new members. If you would like to change it, please
edit it at the link above.
**Henrik
==Where to get Conlang-L==
The official archives are at http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/conlang.html .
>From there, you can search the archives, get an RSS feed, manage your
subscription, etc.
It's also the ONLY place you can go to sign up and post things to the list.
A read-only archive with a nicer user interface is at
http://archives.conlang.info/ . [As of April 2009 this archive has ceased
mirroring new messages. Henrik Theiling knows about the problem and has said
he's planning to fix it but hasn't had time to do so yet.]
Conlang-L is also _mirrored_ as a Yahoo group, but there is no way to have
posts to the Yahoo group sent to the actual list. Do *not* subscribe to the
Yahoo group. It has no admin anymore. Go to
http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/conlang.html instead!
==A brief history of the list==
The list evolved from some informal email conversations among an early group
of language enthusiasts. The earliest mail mirror was run by John Ross out of
the BU physics department, and was up and running by 29 July 1991. It moved to
Denmark on 23 March, 1993.
The original note reads in part:
''By agreement with John Ross, the CONLANG mailing list has been moved to
diku.dk, the mail hub of the CS Department of the University of Copenhagen.
Send all submissions to CONLANG at diku dot dk. The address at buphy still
works, but it is just an alias for the new list.''
''Lars Mathiesen (U of Copenhagen CS Dept) (Humour NOT marked)''
(Note that the submission address in that historical note '''NO LONGER
WORKS'''.)
Later, growing traffic and changes at the university necessitated a move. In
January–February of 1997 the list moved to its current home at Brown
University's LISTSERV server. David Durand made the move and actively
moderated the list from that point on.
Before the move, threads centered on debates on the relative merits of
[[auxlang]]s had become common on CONLANG; these were often incendiary and
irritated many listmembers. Accordingly, when the new CONLANG list was set up
at Brown, a sister list AUXLANG was set up to cater to participants of these
threads, and auxlang advocacy was banned from CONLANG. It still is.
(Dispassionate discussion of auxlangs is welcome.)
In ??? John Cowan took over actual moderation duties, as "Lord of the
Instrumentality".
Later the torch was passed to Henrik Theiling.
==List behaviour==
The CONLANG list rejects attachments.
===Posting limits===
As a traffic-limiting measure, if the list receives more than 99 messages in a
given day (in Brown's time zone), all subsequent messages will be
automatically held and not delivered until the admin unblocks the list.
Sometimes, during longer periods of high traffic, a further limit is imposed
restricting each person to five posts a day. ''This restriction is currently
in force.'' Messages beyond the daily limit are simply bounced, not held for
the next day.
Posters are encouraged to consolidate several shorter replies on a single
topic into a single message.
==Subject Topic Tags==
In the subject line of a post, you can mark the post with one of the following
tags. Tags are only recognised if a colon follows immediately: no other
decoration (e.g. brackets, an extra space) should be used. Any 'Re:' etc. is
irrelevant -- the software skips it.
Good tag syntax:
CHAT: Is the world really round?
Bad tag syntax:
[CHAT]: Is the world really round?
These are the official tags the listserv software can be instructed to
filter automatically. There are currently exactly four:
* OT: off-topic stuff
* CHAT: off-topic stuff of the conversational sort
* USAGE: natural language usage (all of the YAEPT and similar should use this)
* THEORY: linguistic theory discussions
Only the above tags are official and configured for filtering. However, most
advanced mail clients can be set to have extra filters, such as for the
following unofficial tags:
* OFFLIST: not actually seen on-list, this tag is added to make explicitly
clear that you are taking a subject offlist (i.e. you're emailing someone
directly about it)
The following are explicitly not included in the list of filterable tags:
* META: threads about CONLANG-L itself
* TECH: technical issues (e.g. email programs, list-related technical
problems, etc)
Finally, there are two meta-tags:
* [CONLANG]: This should not be actually added when starting a new subject;
you can make the listserv prepend it automatically to all email (so that you
can set your mail client to filter all list traffic)
* "was": used to change the subject, or more commonly, to indicate that the
subject of a thread changed a while ago and you're no longer pretending it's
about the original topic
Example:
JAMA says flat earth leads to flat [@] (was CHAT: Is the world really round?)
Note that tags ARE included after the "was", but "Re:" is NOT, nor is
[CONLANG].
==Acronyms==
List of acronyms specific to the Conlang Mailing List:
* AFMCL - "As for my conlang.."
** AFMOCL - "As for my own conlang"
* ANADEW - "A natlang's already dunnit, except worse"
* ANADEWism - Something you thought was unique, but ANADEW
* IML - "in my 'lect" (dialect or [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiolect
idiolect], depending on context)
* LCC - the [http://conference.conlang.org Language Creation Conference]
* LCS - the [http://conlang.org Language Creation Society]
* NCNC - "No cross, no crown". In the context of the list, "don't discuss
religion or politics"
([http://recycledknowledge.blogspot.com/2006/05/no-cross-no-crown.html not its
more general meaning]).
* NLF2DWS or NLWS - Non-linear [fully 2-dimensional] writing system
* YAEPT (the original acronym) - Yet Another English Pronunciation Thread
** YADPT ... Dutch Pronunciation ...
** YAGPT ... German Pronunciation ...
** YAEGT ... English Grammar ...
** YAEUT ... English Usage ...
** general pattern: YA(Language)(Topic)T
Acronyms not on this list might be in general usage: try
[http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3Aafaict Google's define:] or
[http://www.acronymfinder.com/ Acronym Finder].
==Other conlang-specific vocabulary==
>From [http://cassowary.free.fr/Linguistics/Conlang%20Dictionary/ here] and
[http://arthaey.mine.nu/~arthaey/conlang/faq.html here]. See also [[Conlang
terminology]].
con__
* constructed __ (generally a contraction): conlang, conworld, conhistory,
conculture, ...
__lang
* a language characterised by ___ (generally a contraction): conlang, artlang,
auxlang, ...
[[artlang]]
# A language constructed for the beauty or fun of doing so. [From art(istic) +
lang(uage)]
# (See conlang) [From art(ificial) + lang(uage)]
[[auxlang]]
* A language constructed to replace or complement natlangs to facilitate
cross-linguistic communication. [From aux(iliary) + lang(uage)]
concultural [From con(structed) + cultur(e) + al]
* Adjective form of "conculture".
[[conculture]] [From con(structed) + culture]
* A fictional culture created as a backdrop to a conlang. See also "conworld".
[[conlang]] [From con(structed) + lang(uage)]
# n. A constructed language
# v. To construct a language
[[CONLANG]] (all caps), conlang-l, Conlang-L, or CONLANG-L
* A very active conlang mailing list hosted by brown.edu, and currently
operated by Henrik Theiling
[[conworld]] [From con(structed) + world]
* A fictional world created to host a conlang or conculture. See also
"conculture".
[[engelang]] /ˈendʒlæŋ/ [From eng(ineered) + lang(uage)]
* A conlang that is designed to certain criteria, such that it is objectively
testable whether the criteria are met or not. This is different from claiming
that the criteria themselves are 'objective'. For example, the Lojban/Loglan
roots are designed to be maximally recognisable to the speakers of the
(numerically) largest languages in the world in proportion to the number of
speakers. It is not a matter of taste whether this criterion is met; it is
something that can be tested. (by John Cowan) [From eng(ineered) + lang(uage)]
etabnannery /raːmnænəɹi/ (rare)
* The state of appearing entirely unpredictable, but, upon closer analysis,
failing at even being that. [From Etá̄bnann(i), a conlang by Tristan McLeay,
which was supposed to have an unpredictable orthography, but ended up just
having a confusing one. Damn people trying to make patterns everywhere. At
least it's a bugger to typeset!... errm... back to the derivation + -ery]
maggelity /məˈgɛlɪti/ (rare) [From Maggel, a conlang by Christophe
Grandsire which has a rarely predictable orthography]
# The state of being entirely unpredictable. (Tristan McLeay)
# The state of being regularly unpredictable, such as to horribly confuse
anyone unfamiliar with the language, lulling them into a full sense of
security before pointing out, cartoon-character-style, that the ground no
longer exists where they're standing. (Tristan McLeay and H. S. Teoh)
Maggel's Paradox (rare)
* Your radical ideas have already occurred to others. (Muke Tever)
[[natlang]] [From nat(ural) + lang(uage)]
# A natural language, i.e., one that naturally developed in the world, as
opposed to a conlang.
ObConlang (or ObCL)
* Just before something about conlanging in an otherwise off-topic post.
* From ob(ligatory) + conlang (i.e., an obligatory on-topic comment about
conlangs just so that the post isn't completely off-topic).
[[translation relay]]
* A game similar to Telephone or Chinese Whispers, wherein the participants
translate a passage one at a time, in serial, into their own languages - and
then marvel at how far from the original the translations have gotten.
==CXS (Conlang X-SAMPA)==
[[CXS]] is a version of X-SAMPA for use on the CONLANG mailing list. X-SAMPA
is a way to write the IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet) using normal
plain-ASCII text that everyone can read.
* [http://www.theiling.de/ipa/ Theiling Online: Conlang X-Sampa (CXS)] -
includes CXS-to-IPA conversion chart
* [http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Conlang/Appendix/CXS CXS at Wikibooks]
==Related lists==
The Auxlang list, mentioned above, is dedicated to international auxiliary
languages. Its archives and subscription interface are at
http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/auxlang.html .
The list re...@calcifer.valdyas.org is dedicated to the planning and
conducting of [[conlang relay]]s, q.v.
==Resources==
* [http://www.arthaey.com/conlang/faq.html Arthaey's Conlang FAQ]
* [http://www.langmaker.com LangMaker] - repository of many conlang
"biographies"
* [http://wiki.frath.net Frath Wiki] - a similar site, and host of the
Conlang-L (wikified) FAQ
* [http://www.omniglot.com Omniglot] - which has information on more writing
systems than you thought could exist
{{Conlangculture}}
[[Category:Terminology]]
Messages in this topic (36)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Mood and author opinion
Posted by: "Leonardo Castro" leolucas1...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 6:28 am ((PDT))
2013/6/29 Alex Fink <000...@gmail.com>:
> On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 09:11:18 -0300, Leonardo Castro <leolucas1...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>It seems that the ideas of "may", "will hardly", "must", "not", etc.,
>>are logically equivalent to "the author <verb>".
>
> Responding to Padraic's confusion, Leonardo's "author" is what's more usually
> framed as "speaker" (primacy of speech, wahey), that is, the person being
> deictically referred to by the first person singular.
Yes, I meant "the author of the sentences". The definition "the person
being deictically referred to by the first person singular" is great!
I avoided "speaker" because one could be reading someone else's
speech, and so I don't know who would be considered as the "speaker".
>>Naturally, instead of
>>explicitly writing "the author", the verb could simply receive a
>>particular form to mean that it's an opinion of the author or a fact
>>that doesn't depend on the text character's opinions. Apparently,
>>English can do this with adverbs:
> [...]
>>Do any nat or conlangs express this type of ideas by means of a
>>specific conjugation of verbs such as "guess", "believe", "deny",
>>"affirms", etc., instead of using "might", "probably", "not", "yes",
>>etc.?
>
> Identifying these two sorts of phenomena, or at least considering doing so,
> seems to be the sort of thing that Sai and I have a habit of doing.
> In the gripping language, the resulting system was the so-called ascriptors,
> which are a lot like evidentials and modals and the lot with a
> source-of-information argument, which in mòst cases defaults to the speaker.
> They are the default thing used to render many of what in English are verbs
> taking a clause argument, but their syntax marks them as clearly nonverbal:
> in the sentences below they come in first position. Thus we could have e.g.
> deduction rain "it must (therefore) be raining"
> deduction Harry rain "Harry deduces that it's raining"
> assumption rain "let's say it's raining"
> assumption Harry rain "Harry assumes that it's raining"
> sight rain "it appears (visibly) to be raining"
> sight Harry rain "Harry sees that it's raining"
> hearsay.distrusted rain "it's said to be raining (but I don't believe it)"
> -- note this one is nòt speaker default
The "but I don't believe it" part is the difference between what I'm
proposing and how most languages I know work.
In Portuguese, the expression "{verb}-se que..." after a verb makes
something similar to "it is {verb}-PP that..." in English. For
instance, "sabe-se que..." is similar to "it's know that...". It's
very succinct, so it looks like a "conjugation" associated with the
the person being deictically referred to by the first person singular.
But "afirma-se que" (it's affirmed that) and "nega-se que" (it's
denied that) have the additional idea of "but I don't guarantee what
is being told", while using "sim" (yes) and "não" (not) gives us the
idea of undoubtful information, although we know that we are simply
trusting the person who says that.
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Mood and author opinion
Posted by: "George Corley" gacor...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 7:16 am ((PDT))
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Leonardo Castro <leolucas1...@gmail.com>wrote:
> 2013/6/29 Alex Fink <000...@gmail.com>:
> > On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 09:11:18 -0300, Leonardo Castro <
> leolucas1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>It seems that the ideas of "may", "will hardly", "must", "not", etc.,
> >>are logically equivalent to "the author <verb>".
> >
> > Responding to Padraic's confusion, Leonardo's "author" is what's more
> usually framed as "speaker" (primacy of speech, wahey), that is, the person
> being deictically referred to by the first person singular.
>
> Yes, I meant "the author of the sentences". The definition "the person
> being deictically referred to by the first person singular" is great!
> I avoided "speaker" because one could be reading someone else's
> speech, and so I don't know who would be considered as the "speaker".
"Speaker" is a convention -- linguists generally talk about language in
terms of speech, since it's generally accepted that speech is primary and
writing is secondary.
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: Animal Noises?
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" tsela...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 6:46 am ((PDT))
On 24 June 2013 18:00, Scar Cvxni <jeviscac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> How many of your conlangs have animal noises? Do you have specific animal
> species in the worlds your languages inhabit as well?
>
> I've just found my old notes for one of my conlangs, called Yuun.
>
> Animals are kept in an area called "Maab kihaa", or "Place of livestock",
> and they all have different sounds, e.g.
>
> sheep - dêêêêêê
> a certain type of local bird - reeeeca
> lizards - tetetetete
>
> etc. I'm toying with the idea of writing a couple of children's books in
> Yuun, just for fun.
>
So far, I've only got two in the Moten dictionary:
_mja_: "meow"
_ufu_: "woof"
Corresponding animals should be relatively obvious :P .
Interestingly, while _ufu_ is only used as an onomatopoeia, _mja_ is also
used as the stem of the verb _imjaj_: "to meow", and can also be found in
the noun _mjan_: cat (maybe via a now obsolete agent suffix _-an_, which
may also be the origin of the noun _linan_: "bird", from _|li|n_: "to fly,
to soar").
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: Animal Noises?
Posted by: "Garth Wallace" gwa...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 9:05 am ((PDT))
Samadurian for "meow" is /mieɹ.mieɹ/ (/i/ is realized here as its
approximant allophone [j]) or /miɹl.miɹl/ (/ɹ/ as its vocalic
allophone /ɚ/). The latter is a more plaintive meow, but they're more
or less interchangeable. "Bark" would be /hɹaf.hɹaf/, I think...not
sure on that one, mainly because I don't know if /f/ should be a valid
coda consonant.
I'm not really sure what animals the Ilion people have. Terran animals
would probably be considered exotic, but that may just mean the
nobility would be more likely to acquire them to show off their
wealth.
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
<tsela...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 24 June 2013 18:00, Scar Cvxni <jeviscac...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> How many of your conlangs have animal noises? Do you have specific animal
>> species in the worlds your languages inhabit as well?
>>
>> I've just found my old notes for one of my conlangs, called Yuun.
>>
>> Animals are kept in an area called "Maab kihaa", or "Place of livestock",
>> and they all have different sounds, e.g.
>>
>> sheep - dêêêêêê
>> a certain type of local bird - reeeeca
>> lizards - tetetetete
>>
>> etc. I'm toying with the idea of writing a couple of children's books in
>> Yuun, just for fun.
>>
>
> So far, I've only got two in the Moten dictionary:
>
> _mja_: "meow"
> _ufu_: "woof"
>
> Corresponding animals should be relatively obvious :P .
>
> Interestingly, while _ufu_ is only used as an onomatopoeia, _mja_ is also
> used as the stem of the verb _imjaj_: "to meow", and can also be found in
> the noun _mjan_: cat (maybe via a now obsolete agent suffix _-an_, which
> may also be the origin of the noun _linan_: "bird", from _|li|n_: "to fly,
> to soar").
> --
> Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
>
> http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
> http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5.1. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" tsela...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 6:58 am ((PDT))
On 7 June 2013 19:12, Allison Swenson <jlon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've seen that quite commonly on houses in Mexico (along with "se renta"
> for "for rent").
>
>
I like the Modern Greek manner of simply using a passive verb:
ενοικιάζεται: for rent (literally "it is rented"), also in the plural as in
the common: ενοικιάζονται δομάτια: rooms to let :) .
For "for sale", Modern Greek has πωλείται, also a passive verb (meaning "it
is sold"). But interestingly this verb (πωλώ: to sell) is a variant only
ever (commonly) used in this construction. The more common variant of the
verb "to sell" is πουλώ (passive form πουλιέται, which is *never* used on
signs to mean "for sale" :) ).
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
Messages in this topic (43)
________________________________________________________________________
5.2. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
Posted by: "George Corley" gacor...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 7:09 am ((PDT))
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
tsela...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7 June 2013 19:12, Allison Swenson <jlon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I've seen that quite commonly on houses in Mexico (along with "se renta"
> > for "for rent").
> >
> >
> I like the Modern Greek manner of simply using a passive verb:
> ������������: for rent (literally "it is rented"), also in the plural as in
> the common: ������������� �������: rooms to let :) .
>
> For "for sale", Modern Greek has ��������, also a passive verb (meaning "it
> is sold"). But interestingly this verb (����: to sell) is a variant only
> ever (commonly) used in this construction. The more common variant of the
> verb "to sell" is ����� (passive form ���������, which is *never* used on
> signs to mean "for sale" :) ).
That's very interesting, considering the parallel English structure you
cite would be interpreted as resultative ('It's rented" means that the
room/apartment/whatever has already been leased to someone).
Messages in this topic (43)
________________________________________________________________________
5.3. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" tsela...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 7:20 am ((PDT))
On 1 July 2013 16:01, George Corley <gacor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> That's very interesting, considering the parallel English structure you
> cite would be interpreted as resultative ('It's rented" means that the
> room/apartment/whatever has already been leased to someone).
>
Yeah, I felt that as well when writing "it is rented". Indeed, the
difference between resultative and non-resultative is obvious in the case
of "for sale": πωλείται is non-resultative, while AFAIK πουλιέται can be.
That said, when you look at the active forms, even in English the
interpretation can be either resultative or non-resultative: "I'm selling
the house" doesn't necessarily mean that you are right now about to sign
the contract, it can also simply mean that you've put your house for sale,
and have all intentions to sell the house, but haven't got a buyer yet.
Greek just extends this ambiguity to the passive voice.
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
Messages in this topic (43)
________________________________________________________________________
5.4. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
Posted by: "George Corley" gacor...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 7:32 am ((PDT))
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
tsela...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1 July 2013 16:01, George Corley <gacor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > That's very interesting, considering the parallel English structure you
> > cite would be interpreted as resultative ('It's rented" means that the
> > room/apartment/whatever has already been leased to someone).
> >
>
> Yeah, I felt that as well when writing "it is rented". Indeed, the
> difference between resultative and non-resultative is obvious in the case
> of "for sale": �������� is non-resultative, while AFAIK ��������� can be.
>
> That said, when you look at the active forms, even in English the
> interpretation can be either resultative or non-resultative: "I'm selling
> the house" doesn't necessarily mean that you are right now about to sign
> the contract, it can also simply mean that you've put your house for sale,
> and have all intentions to sell the house, but haven't got a buyer yet.
> Greek just extends this ambiguity to the passive voice.
For me, the default interpretation of "I'm selling the house" means that I
have put it up for sale. In order to encourage the interpretation that the
actual sale is in progress (as in signing the deed, exchanging money and
all that), I'd say something like "I'm selling the house right now" -- and
even then, it's hard to get. I guess it is ambiguous -- but I get the sense
that in most cases it biases toward offering something for sale, maybe
because it seems I'm referring to an ongoing process rather than a discrete
event.
Messages in this topic (43)
________________________________________________________________________
5.5. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" tsela...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 7:48 am ((PDT))
On 1 July 2013 16:31, George Corley <gacor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> For me, the default interpretation of "I'm selling the house" means that I
> have put it up for sale. In order to encourage the interpretation that the
> actual sale is in progress (as in signing the deed, exchanging money and
> all that), I'd say something like "I'm selling the house right now" -- and
> even then, it's hard to get. I guess it is ambiguous -- but I get the sense
> that in most cases it biases toward offering something for sale, maybe
> because it seems I'm referring to an ongoing process rather than a discrete
> event.
>
I agree. My point was more that this interpretation, which you feel is
natural for you in the active voice, is simply the same in the Greek
version, even in the passive voice. In this case, the Greek passive voice
is more transparently parallel to the Greek active voice, while in English
the passive adds a resultative meaning that is usually missing from the
active voice. When you consider it that way, the Greek use of the passive
voice in those cases becomes quite logical. It's English that is a bit
weird for adding a resultative meaning to its passive "it is rented" (BTW,
how would you form a passive that is not resultative in English? Even "it
is being rented" feels like the room is occupied right now).
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
Messages in this topic (43)
________________________________________________________________________
5.6. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
Posted by: "George Corley" gacor...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 8:08 am ((PDT))
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
tsela...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1 July 2013 16:31, George Corley <gacor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > For me, the default interpretation of "I'm selling the house" means that
> I
> > have put it up for sale. In order to encourage the interpretation that
> the
> > actual sale is in progress (as in signing the deed, exchanging money and
> > all that), I'd say something like "I'm selling the house right now" --
> and
> > even then, it's hard to get. I guess it is ambiguous -- but I get the
> sense
> > that in most cases it biases toward offering something for sale, maybe
> > because it seems I'm referring to an ongoing process rather than a
> discrete
> > event.
> >
>
> I agree. My point was more that this interpretation, which you feel is
> natural for you in the active voice, is simply the same in the Greek
> version, even in the passive voice. In this case, the Greek passive voice
> is more transparently parallel to the Greek active voice, while in English
> the passive adds a resultative meaning that is usually missing from the
> active voice. When you consider it that way, the Greek use of the passive
> voice in those cases becomes quite logical. It's English that is a bit
> weird for adding a resultative meaning to its passive "it is rented" (BTW,
> how would you form a passive that is not resultative in English? Even "it
> is being rented" feels like the room is occupied right now).
In order to ensure a non-resultative meaning, I would phrase it like "It is
up for rent" or "It is up for sale", which isn't really a passive
construction at all. I can't really think of a way to make a true passive
that doesn't suggest a resultative reading.
Messages in this topic (43)
________________________________________________________________________
5.7. Re: Sold here / for sale / on sale / on sale here
Posted by: "Roger Mills" romi...@yahoo.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 8:41 am ((PDT))
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <tsela...@gmail.com>
On 1 July 2013 16:01, George Corley <gacor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> That's very interesting, considering the parallel English structure you
> cite would be interpreted as resultative ('It's rented" means that the
> room/apartment/whatever has already been leased to someone).
>
Yeah, I felt that as well when writing "it is rented". Indeed, the
difference between resultative and non-resultative is obvious in the case
of "for sale": πωλείται is non-resultative, while AFAIK πουλιέται can be.
========================================
IIRC modern Greek has no infinitive form of the verb...? Therefore, might that
passive finite form be interpreted as "to be rented ~ to be sold"??
Messages in this topic (43)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6a. Re: Conlang punctuation.
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" tsela...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 1, 2013 8:34 am ((PDT))
On 8 June 2013 16:23, Leonardo Castro <leolucas1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do your conlangs have any punctuation peculiarities?
>
> For contextualization:
> www.quicksilvertranslate.com/570/some-punctuation-peculiarities
>
>
Nice that it mentioned non-breaking spaces *before* two-part punctuation in
French :) . I've always felt the absence of space in English made signs
like ! and ? too close to the preceding word for comfort. Note however that
in good French typography the size of the space *before* the punctuation is
not the same as the size of the space *after* it. The space after
punctuation is a normal space (similar to the one between words), while the
space before punctuation should be a thin space, about a fifth to a sixth
of an em-width. Unfortunately, web typography usually doesn't allow an easy
way to type in non-breaking thin spaces...
Another peculiar punctuation is that of Modern Greek, which uses the
semi-colon as a question mark, while the role of the semi-colon is taken
over by the raised dot. In principle, the role of the colon should also be
taken by the raised dot, but in practice most Greek speakers now simply use
the colon.
My own Moten doesn't really have an orthography, just a romanisation, so I
just use the punctuation standard of the language I'm writing in, usually
English. On the other hand I have a language for which I created a peculiar
punctuation on purpose: my Chasmäöcho is written using Latin letters and
existing punctuation, but it uses it all differently, just for the sake of
being different (I was in a bit of a contrary mood at that time :P). The
Listserv archives have quite a lot of material on Chasmäöcho (not all easy
to find), but the relevant post can be found here:
http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0006A&L=CONLANG&P=R6166&I=-3&d=No+Match%3BMatch%3BMatches
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
Messages in this topic (15)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
conlang-nor...@yahoogroups.com
conlang-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
conlang-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
