| Number | Author | Date | Title |
|---|
| Earlier messages |
| 32000 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-18 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32001 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-18 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? - Clarification |
| 32002 | Âàäèì Ïîíàðÿäîâ | 2004-04-18 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32003 | Miguel Carrasquer | 2004-04-18 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? - Clarificat |
| 32004 | Miguel Carrasquer | 2004-04-18 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32005 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-18 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32006 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-18 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? - Clarification |
| 32007 | Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen | 2004-04-18 | Re: [tied] Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32008 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-18 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32009 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32010 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-19 | Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32011 | Miguel Carrasquer | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32012 | P&G | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32013 | P&G | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32014 | tgpedersen | 2004-04-19 | Re: Arminius/Hermann |
| 32015 | tgpedersen | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Snorri on "Odin's journey" [Was:Re: Whence Grimm?] |
| 32016 | tgpedersen | 2004-04-19 | Compound verbs |
| 32017 | Miguel Carrasquer | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32018 | P&G | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32019 | enlil@... | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32020 | Piotr Gasiorowski | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Arminius/Hermann |
| 32021 | enlil@... | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32022 | enlil@... | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32023 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32024 | enlil@... | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32025 | enlil@... | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32026 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32027 | enlil@... | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32028 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32029 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32030 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32031 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32032 | Sergejus Tarasovas | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32033 | Miguel Carrasquer | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32034 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32035 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32036 | Sergejus Tarasovas | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32037 | Brian M. Scott | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Arminius/Hermann |
| 32038 | george knysh | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Snorri on "Odin's journey" |
| 32039 | Mate Kapović | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues |
| 32040 | Mate Kapovic | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Acc. plural of o- and eh2-stems (was: The disappearanceo |
| 32041 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-19 | -osyo (Was: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?) |
| 32042 | Mate Kapovic | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32043 | enlil@... | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32044 | enlil@... | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32045 | enlil@... | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32046 | enlil@... | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32047 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-19 | Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32048 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32049 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues |
| 32050 | Mate Kapović | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32051 | Mate Kapovic | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32052 | Mate Kapovic | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32053 | Brian M. Scott | 2004-04-19 | Re[2]: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32054 | Sergejus Tarasovas | 2004-04-19 | Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32055 | Mate Kapovic | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues |
| 32056 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32057 | Sergejus Tarasovas | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32058 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32059 | Mate Kapovic | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32060 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32061 | Miguel Carrasquer | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32062 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32063 | Sergejus Tarasovas | 2004-04-19 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32064 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32065 | Mate Kapovic | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32066 | Mate Kapovic | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32067 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-19 | Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues |
| 32068 | Mate Kapovic | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32069 | Mate Kapovic | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32070 | Mate Kapovic | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues |
| 32071 | Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues |
| 32072 | enlil@... | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] -osyo (Was: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?) |
| 32073 | enlil@... | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues |
| 32074 | enlil@... | 2004-04-20 | Re: Re[2]: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32075 | enlil@... | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32076 | enlil@... | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32077 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-20 | Re: -osyo (Was: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?) |
| 32078 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-20 | Erosion of Latin -us into Romance (was: Nominative Loss. A strength |
| 32079 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-20 | -osyo 3 (Was: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?) |
| 32080 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-20 | Typing Thorn (was:Arminius/Hermann |
| 32081 | enlil@... | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] Re: -osyo (Was: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?) |
| 32082 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-20 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32083 | enlil@... | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] Erosion of Latin -us into Romance (was: Nominative Loss. |
| 32084 | enlil@... | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] -osyo 3 (Was: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?) |
| 32085 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-20 | [tied] Re: -osyo (Was: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?) |
| 32086 | enlil@... | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32087 | enlil@... | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] Re: -osyo (Was: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?) |
| 32088 | Miguel Carrasquer | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32089 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-20 | Re: Erosion of Latin -us into Romance (was: Nominative Loss. A stre |
| 32090 | Richard Wordingham | 2004-04-20 | [tied] Re: -osyo (Was: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?) |
| 32091 | tgpedersen | 2004-04-20 | Re: Arminius/Hermann |
| 32092 | tgpedersen | 2004-04-20 | Re: Stative, locative etc etc |
| 32093 | tgpedersen | 2004-04-20 | Re: The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues |
| 32094 | tgpedersen | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] Snorri on "Odin's journey" |
| 32095 | george knysh | 2004-04-20 | Re: [tied] Snorri on "Odin's journey" |
| 32096 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-20 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32097 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-20 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| 32098 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-20 | Re: -osyo 3 (Was: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?) |
| 32099 | elmeras2000 | 2004-04-20 | [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory? |
| Later messages |