conlang at Yahoo! Groups

Re: Going NOMAIL: Honeymoon (was Re: Word classification (was Re: Th

David J. Peterson — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 05:08:52 GMT

That's a fun subject header! Just a quick line to let everyone know that I'm back, and I read all the discussion that followed. Thanks for the congratulations

Re: Word classification (was Re: The philosophical language fallacy

Jim Henry — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 02:13:44 GMT

... Do you mean distributional categories -- sets of words that are liable to occur in the same context as each other? Yes, I think members of true

Re: Word classification (was Re: The philosophical language fallacy

Mark J. Reed — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 01:46:51 GMT

There's a growing trend in classification of online resources to use "folksonomies" of this sort, where the audience determines the breakdown via a combination

Re: Word classification (was Re: The philosophical language fallacy

And Rosta — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 00:37:23 GMT

... [...] ... Classifications like the ULD's are useful as a way of ensuring that one has semantic space sufficiently and evenly covered. In working on my own

Re: Word classification (was Re: The philosophical language fallacy

Jim Henry — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 22:36:38 GMT

... How do you reckon that might work? Maybe you could let people use tags rather than categories, with some lexical items getting multiple tags as they might

Re: promiscuity & fidelity (was: Re: The philosophical language fall

Jim Henry — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 21:52:37 GMT

... Since I first encountered Quenya and Noldorin in 1989, I've created about 20 conlangs; the vast majority of which I worked on for less than a year (many

Re: Word classification (was Re: The philosophical language fallacy

Lars Finsen — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 21:48:48 GMT

... Semantic cascade? I like your system, too. Such work is great fun. LEF

Re: Word classification (was Re: The philosophical language fallacy

Rick Harrison — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:54:35 GMT

... I like your scheme and admire the goal of having roughly the same number of words in each class. My own approach has been different. While working on the

Re: promiscuity & fidelity (was: ...)

Jörg Rhiemeier — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 19:42:20 GMT

Hallo! ... I am something like a fickle monogamist. I have ONE main project, the Albic family (and within that currently focussing on one language, Old

Re: Lots of Questions About Tones

ROGER MILLS — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 17:50:05 GMT

... Good observation, though not so simple in practice :-)))) If I'm not mistaken, Sino-Tibetan began with bisyllabic forms, or at least Prefix+monosyl., where

promiscuity & fidelity (was: Re: The philosophical language fallacy

And Rosta — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 17:12:25 GMT

... Have any of the surveys of conlangers conducted on this list over the years looked at the quantity and longevity of our conlangs? Among us, there are

Re: Lots of Questions About Tones

Eugene Oh — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 17:07:20 GMT

On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 12:11 AM, Eldin Raigmore ... I suspect many of the questions will have a simple answer - consonant clusters

Lots of Questions About Tones

Eldin Raigmore — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:11:19 GMT

If I correctly gather which theories about tonogenesis are most widely- or well- -accepted; and if I understand them to the right degree; I don't understand

Re: arithmography (fuit: Re: The philosophical language fallacy)

Jörg Rhiemeier — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 15:33:28 GMT

Hallo! ... Leibniz spoke of it as "characteristica universalis". I cannot provide you with a pointer to his discussion as I myself know of it only from

Word classification (was Re: The philosophical language fallacy (was

Lars Finsen — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 14:07:17 GMT

Hi, Here is the classification system I used when I set up my first substantial word lists in Urianian. There are 17 broad classes that I modified as I went