JISCMail - WORDGRAMMAR Archives

Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Subscriber's Corner

Email Lists

WORDGRAMMAR Archives

December 2009

View:

Show Author | Hide Author

		LISTSERV Archives
		WORDGRAMMAR Home

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Get Password

Subject	From	Date	Size
Re: What is a Word (again) (was re Re: [WG] meaning of BE (and THAT.rel, and OF)	And Rosta	Sun, 20 Dec 2009 11:18:41 +0000	96 lines
What is a Word (again) (was re Re: [WG] meaning of BE (and THAT.rel, and OF)	Michael Turner	Sun, 20 Dec 2009 13:28:41 +0900	336 lines
Re: meaning of BE (and THAT.rel, and OF) - CORRECTION	Michael Turner	Sun, 20 Dec 2009 12:30:31 +0900	274 lines
Re: meaning of BE (and THAT.rel, and OF)	Michael Turner	Sun, 20 Dec 2009 11:45:11 +0900	231 lines
Re: meaning of BE (and THAT.rel, and OF)	And Rosta	Sat, 19 Dec 2009 20:19:44 +0000	123 lines
Re: meaning of BE (and THAT.rel, and OF)	Michael Turner	Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:06:51 +0900	106 lines
Re: meaning of BE	And Rosta	Sat, 19 Dec 2009 13:13:20 +0000	31 lines
Re: meaning of BE (was: Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:43:09 +0900	251 lines
meaning of BE (was: Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	And Rosta	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:26:52 +0000	97 lines
Re: lexeme vs lexical item	And Rosta	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:49:57 +0000	34 lines
Comment requested on list owner request [Fwd: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Michael Turner	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:49:58 +0900	289 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Michael Turner	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:23:11 +0900	81 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	And Rosta	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:44:54 +0000	18 lines
WG software - protocols for user requirements management	Michael Turner	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:31:02 +0900	47 lines
Re: Zen Verbs and Smelling without Noses? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:40:01 +0900	117 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Michael Turner	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:32:17 +0900	726 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Michael Turner	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:17:31 +0900	237 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Michael Turner	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:33:02 +0900	308 lines
Re: Zen Verbs and Smelling without Noses? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Linas Vepstas	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:00:36 -0600	89 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Nikolas Gisborne	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:19:09 +0000	1435 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	And Rosta	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:53:03 +0000	306 lines
Re: Zen Verbs (but meaty relations)? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	And Rosta	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:25:50 +0000	308 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Nikolas Gisborne	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:30:41 +0000	91 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Nikolas Gisborne	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:29:24 +0000	558 lines
Re: Zen Verbs and Smelling without Noses? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:28:00 +0900	114 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Michael Turner	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:08:07 +0900	145 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Linas Vepstas	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:53:14 -0600	38 lines
Re: Zen Verbs and Smelling without Noses? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Linas Vepstas	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:39:59 -0600	58 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:25:20 +0900	219 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	And Rosta	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:16:04 +0000	97 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Nikolas Gisborne	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:15:02 +0000	112 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:51:42 +0900	593 lines
Re: [Fwd: Crisis in copenhagen - the pressure is building]	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:48:53 +0900	211 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	And Rosta	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:40:31 +0000	130 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Nikolas Gisborne	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:39:03 +0000	203 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Richard Hudson	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:29:43 +0000	31 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	And Rosta	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:17:22 +0000	54 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Richard Hudson	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:00:31 +0000	65 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Nikolas Gisborne	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:36:09 +0000	1146 lines
[Fwd: Crisis in copenhagen - the pressure is building]	Richard Hudson	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:26:02 +0000	135 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:05:19 +0900	78 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:31:06 +0900	122 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:19:48 +0900	93 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Richard Hudson	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:17:36 +0000	79 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Richard Hudson	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:01:00 +0000	91 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	And Rosta	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:53:42 +0000	30 lines
Re: Zen Verbs and Smelling without Noses? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:40:23 +0900	81 lines
Re: Zen Verbs and Smelling without Noses? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:21:10 +0900	139 lines
Re: Zen Verbs and Smelling without Noses? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Linas Vepstas	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:38:37 -0600	51 lines
Re: Zen Verbs and Smelling without Noses? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Linas Vepstas	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:22:54 -0600	101 lines
Re: Zen Verbs and Smelling without Noses? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:05:09 +0900	71 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:52:42 +0900	184 lines
Re: Zen Verbs and Smelling without Noses? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Linas Vepstas	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 18:30:04 -0600	43 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Linas Vepstas	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 18:06:36 -0600	34 lines
Re: Zen Verbs (but meaty relations)? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Linas Vepstas	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:36:22 -0600	48 lines
Re: Zen Verbs (but meaty relations)? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Linas Vepstas	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:09:55 -0600	22 lines
Re: functions vs. relations Re: [WG] directionality -> asymmetry	Richard Hudson	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 21:56:17 +0000	80 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Richard Hudson	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:45:40 +0000	127 lines
functions vs. relations Re: [WG] directionality -> asymmetry	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 02:07:22 +0900	67 lines
Re: Zen Verbs (but meaty relations)? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 01:43:16 +0900	322 lines
Re: Zen Verbs (but meaty relations)? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 01:27:06 +0900	81 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Linas Vepstas	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:42:47 -0600	92 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Nikolas Gisborne	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:37:50 +0000	71 lines
Re: lexeme vs lexical item	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 23:36:27 +0900	57 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Linas Vepstas	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:30:43 -0600	76 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 23:17:34 +0900	458 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 22:37:09 +0900	78 lines
Re: Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Nikolas Gisborne	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:34:38 +0000	687 lines
Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 22:16:24 +0900	25 lines
Re: quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 22:08:53 +0900	162 lines
Speak, Memory - was Re: [WG] quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 21:21:47 +0900	187 lines
Re: Quantity and Value Re: [WG] My seditious views, explicated if not expiated (was Re: [WG] combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:46:02 +0900	154 lines
quantifying arguments [was: Re: [WG] more on the argument/value distinction]	Nikolas Gisborne	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:16:11 +0000	182 lines
Re: Zen Verbs (but meaty relations)? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:31:04 +0900	141 lines
Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Richard Hudson	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:28:10 +0000	97 lines
Re: lexeme vs lexical item	Richard Hudson	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:54:09 +0000	55 lines
Re: Zen Verbs and Smelling without Noses? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:57:05 +0900	109 lines
Re: Zen Verbs (but meaty relations)? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	And Rosta	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:39:37 +0000	46 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	And Rosta	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:48:27 +0000	35 lines
Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:20:21 +0900	100 lines
Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Linas Vepstas	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:18:23 -0600	45 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Linas Vepstas	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:26:46 -0600	68 lines
Re: Zen Verbs (but meaty relations)? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Linas Vepstas	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:42:14 -0600	58 lines
Re: lexeme vs lexical item	Linas Vepstas	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:10:01 -0600	27 lines
Re: lexeme vs lexical item	And Rosta	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:06:04 +0000	22 lines
Re: Zen Verbs (but meaty relations)? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Richard Hudson	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:38:35 +0000	257 lines
Re: This way to THE beach (was Re: [WG] directionality -> asymmetry)	Richard Hudson	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:33:26 +0000	230 lines
Re: Quantity and Value Re: [WG] My seditious views, explicated if not expiated (was Re: [WG] combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Richard Hudson	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:03:24 +0000	132 lines
Re: Quantity and Value Re: [WG] My seditious views, explicated if not expiated (was Re: [WG] combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Sascha Griffiths	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:36:25 +0000	104 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Nikolas Gisborne	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:01:58 +0000	51 lines
Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	And Rosta	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:20:50 +0000	34 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 02:18:44 +0900	149 lines
Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 01:34:37 +0900	105 lines
Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	And Rosta	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:41:16 +0000	38 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	And Rosta	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:28:52 +0000	116 lines
Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:46:26 +0900	241 lines
Re: Zen Verbs (but meaty relations)? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:52:35 +0900	258 lines
Re: Quantity and Value Re: [WG] My seditious views, explicated if not expiated (was Re: [WG] combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:55:22 +0900	116 lines
Re: more on the argument/value distinction	Nikolas Gisborne	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:08:17 +0000	205 lines
Re: This way to THE beach (was Re: [WG] directionality -> asymmetry)	Michael Turner	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:58:53 +0900	259 lines
Re: Quantity and Value Re: [WG] My seditious views, explicated if not expiated (was Re: [WG] combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Richard Hudson	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:29:17 +0000	62 lines
Re: This way to THE beach (was Re: [WG] directionality -> asymmetry)	Richard Hudson	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:13:43 +0000	190 lines
lexeme vs lexical item	Richard Hudson	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:03:29 +0000	17 lines
This way to THE beach (was Re: [WG] directionality -> asymmetry)	Michael Turner	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:50:57 +0900	178 lines
Quantity and Value Re: [WG] My seditious views, explicated if not expiated (was Re: [WG] combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:01:30 +0900	363 lines
Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	And Rosta	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 23:12:58 +0000	159 lines
more on the argument/value distinction	And Rosta	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:49:30 +0000	72 lines
Re: WG wiki (was Re: [WG] Wave invitation)	Richard Hudson	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:50:06 +0000	66 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	Richard Hudson	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:34:47 +0000	177 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	And Rosta	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:28:23 +0000	115 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	Nikolas Gisborne	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:19:50 +0000	59 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	Richard Hudson	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:13:17 +0000	25 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	Richard Hudson	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:06:03 +0000	137 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	Richard Hudson	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 19:51:48 +0000	34 lines
Re: My seditious views, explicated if not expiated (was Re: [WG] combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Richard Hudson	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 19:04:53 +0000	205 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	Michael Turner	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:31:17 +0900	117 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	Nikolas Gisborne	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:30:41 +0000	167 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry (was: Re: I want it back	Michael Turner	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:46:34 +0900	282 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	Michael Turner	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 17:05:12 +0900	126 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry (was: Re: I want it back	Michael Turner	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:07:33 +0900	160 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	And Rosta	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 20:57:01 +0000	36 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry (was: Re: I want it back	Nikolas Gisborne	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 20:10:30 +0000	341 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry (was: Re: I want it back	Nikolas Gisborne	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 19:02:17 +0000	105 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry (was: Re: I want it back	Michael Turner	Mon, 14 Dec 2009 02:48:35 +0900	273 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	And Rosta	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 17:03:40 +0000	46 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry (was: Re: I want it back	Nikolas Gisborne	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 16:16:24 +0000	382 lines
Re: WG wiki (was Re: [WG] Wave invitation)	Michael Turner	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 23:56:29 +0900	49 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry (was: Re: I want it back	Michael Turner	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 23:23:00 +0900	118 lines
I done a nice freudian slip	Nikolas Gisborne	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 14:17:41 +0000	35 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	Nikolas Gisborne	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 14:15:33 +0000	47 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry	And Rosta	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:52:13 +0000	36 lines
Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 21:38:44 +0900	151 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry (was: Re: I want it back	Nikolas Gisborne	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:42:21 +0000	107 lines
Re: intensinality (was back to back (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure))	Nikolas Gisborne	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:10:59 +0000	99 lines
Re: Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	And Rosta	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:04:00 +0000	41 lines
Zen Verbs? (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 17:03:07 +0900	116 lines
Re: directionality -> asymmetry (was: Re: I want it back	Michael Turner	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:45:03 +0900	78 lines
Re: back to back (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:05:49 +0900	315 lines
Re: back to back (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	And Rosta	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 00:20:19 +0000	39 lines
directionality (was: Re: I want it back	And Rosta	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 21:20:57 +0000	19 lines
I want it back	Nikolas Gisborne	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:54:28 +0000	48 lines
Re: back to back (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Nikolas Gisborne	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:33:08 +0000	465 lines
back to the book (was Re: [WG] combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 01:23:15 +0900	58 lines
My seditious views, explicated if not expiated (was Re: [WG] combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Sun, 13 Dec 2009 00:49:55 +0900	160 lines
Re: back to back (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Richard Hudson	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 14:45:12 +0000	164 lines
back to back (was Re:combinatorics of conceptual structure)	Michael Turner	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 23:23:02 +0900	143 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Richard Hudson	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 13:17:52 +0000	72 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	And Rosta	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:59:51 +0000	55 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	And Rosta	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:49:09 +0000	35 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	And Rosta	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:08:06 +0000	29 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Michael Turner	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:05:05 +0900	244 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Nikolas Gisborne	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 08:36:14 +0000	535 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Michael Turner	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 14:08:46 +0900	222 lines
Re: WG wiki (was Re: [WG] Wave invitation) woops!	Richard Hudson	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:59:36 +0000	85 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Richard Hudson	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:49:29 +0000	18 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Nikolas Gisborne	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:54:55 +0000	315 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Nikolas Gisborne	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:54:11 +0000	297 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Michael Turner	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:49:35 +0900	101 lines
Re: WG wiki (was Re: [WG] Wave invitation)	Richard Hudson	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:37:33 +0000	76 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Michael Turner	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:36:14 +0900	102 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Michael Turner	Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:20:24 +0900	141 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Nikolas Gisborne	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:18:58 +0000	238 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	And Rosta	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:08:34 +0000	73 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	And Rosta	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 15:15:09 +0000	77 lines
Re: comparisons with Link Grammar, etc.	Linas Vepstas	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 08:52:47 -0600	68 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	dr jasper holmes	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:38:53 +0000	84 lines
Re: WG wiki (was Re: [WG] Wave invitation)	Richard Hudson	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:32:53 +0000	247 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Richard Hudson	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:00:48 +0000	62 lines
Re: WG wiki (was Re: [WG] Wave invitation)	Michael Turner	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 22:33:38 +0900	234 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	And Rosta	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 13:17:17 +0000	31 lines
Re: WG wiki (was Re: [WG] Wave invitation)	Richard Hudson	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:50:16 +0000	165 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Richard Hudson	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:32:10 +0000	65 lines
Re: comparisons with Link Grammar, etc.	Michael Turner	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:45:35 +0900	131 lines
Re: comparisons with Link Grammar, etc.	Linas Vepstas	Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:54:15 -0600	64 lines
Re: comparisons with Link Grammar, etc.	Michael Turner	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 04:16:19 +0900	36 lines
Re: comparisons with Link Grammar, etc.	Linas Vepstas	Thu, 10 Dec 2009 09:55:29 -0600	49 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Michael Turner	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:15:28 +0900	49 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	dr jasper holmes	Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:46:31 +0000	191 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	Michael Turner	Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:28:53 +0900	153 lines
Re: combinatorics of conceptual structure	dr jasper holmes	Thu, 10 Dec 2009 09:26:15 +0000	60 lines
comparisons with Link Grammar, etc.	Michael Turner	Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:58:22 +0900	102 lines
combinatorics of conceptual structure	And Rosta	Thu, 10 Dec 2009 01:14:11 +0000	24 lines
Re: WG wiki (was Re: [WG] Wave invitation)	Linas Vepstas	Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:27:53 -0600	47 lines
WG default inheritance in plain English? (was Re: [WG] Wave invitation)	Michael Turner	Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:32:48 +0900	47 lines
Re: Wave invitation	dr jasper holmes	Wed, 9 Dec 2009 09:03:37 +0000	43 lines
WG wiki (was Re: [WG] Wave invitation)	Michael Turner	Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:17:50 +0900	145 lines
Re: Wave invitation	And Rosta	Tue, 8 Dec 2009 21:51:34 +0000	24 lines
Re: Wave invitation	dr jasper holmes	Tue, 8 Dec 2009 19:47:56 +0000	57 lines
Re: Wave invitation	Richard Hudson	Tue, 8 Dec 2009 17:18:20 +0000	34 lines
Re: Wave invitation	Steven Strang	Tue, 8 Dec 2009 08:55:19 -0500	78 lines
Re: Wave invitation	Michael Turner	Tue, 8 Dec 2009 22:50:45 +0900	55 lines
Re: Wave invitation	Steven Strang	Tue, 8 Dec 2009 08:38:01 -0500	48 lines
Re: Wave invitation	Michael Turner	Tue, 8 Dec 2009 22:08:23 +0900	24 lines
Wave invitation	dr jasper holmes	Tue, 8 Dec 2009 10:31:26 +0000	14 lines

WORDGRAMMAR Archives

December 2009

Options

Subject

From

Date

Size

JiscMail Tools

RSS Feeds and Sharing

Search Archives

Archives