There are 15 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1.1. Re: Labial lateral? (was: In the Land of Invented Languages)
From: Jörg Rhiemeier
1.2. Re: Labial lateral?
From: R A Brown
1.3. Re: Labial lateral?
From: Charles W Brickner
2.1. Re: Transcription system for Books
From: Garth Wallace
3a. Re: Persian and Sound Changes and Uzbek
From: Eamon Graham
4a. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
From: Matthew A. Gurevitch
4b. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
From: R A Brown
4c. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
From: Michael Everson
4d. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
From: R A Brown
4e. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
From: MorphemeAddict
4f. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
From: A. da Mek
4g. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
From: R A Brown
4h. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
From: A. da Mek
4i. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
From: Padraic Brown
4j. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
From: Dustfinger Batailleur
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1.1. Re: Labial lateral? (was: In the Land of Invented Languages)
Posted by: "Jörg Rhiemeier" joerg_rhieme...@web.de
Date: Sun Aug 5, 2012 1:21 pm ((PDT))
Hallo conlangers!
On Sunday 05 August 2012 16:51:15 R A Brown wrote:
> On 04/08/2012 20:27, And Rosta wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > Claudio also says that the "more rigorous" realization of
> >
> > this phoneme would be as a nonlingual lateral in which
> >
> > the lips are the active articulator.
>
> That's not in version 2.1 (Sep. 1997) which I was working
> from; but I see it was added later and appears in version
> 4.2 (Jan. 2002). The wording in the second version does
> suggest that there may have been some discussion of this
> phoneme on the Langdev list.
Apparently.
> > He supposes, incorrectly, that laterality requires
> > airflow around both sides of a midsagittal occlusion
> > (rather than just at least one side),
>
> Are you sure? He writes, when explaining the 'easier' method
> of version 2.1: "the easiest way to realize it seems to be
> by the tongue's tip between lips, *either in the middle or
> at one side*: in this position imagine to pronounce a common
> [l]" [my emphasis];
I have tried; it sounds a bit like [l] and [w] simultaneously.
> and again when he of the "more rigorous"
> pronunciation" he writes that it "would be to put lips near
> only in their central part and leaving two spaces on the
> sides, though it seems a difficult position, *or* to put
> them near on a side and leave a space on the other side" [my
> emphasis].
I can at least manage the latter (the former may be possible
to some, but I don't seem to master it), but it doesn't sound
much different from an ordinary [w].
> > and hence that this realization would be difficult, but
> > in fact that's not a requirement of laterality and the
> > sound is easy to produce, tho acoustically I don't think
> > it's any different from a bilabial approximant. (Liva's
> > "Laterals" could perfectly well be renamed
> > "Approximants".)
>
> I agree - I think it would be heard as a bilabial
> approximant. But I do not think Claudio's "more rigorous"
> pronunciation is a 'lateral approximant'.
If the passage is off centre and no frication occurs, it is
by definition a lateral approximant, I would say. But as I
said above, it doesn't seem to sound much different from an
ordinary [w], so I would not expect any language to contrast
it against the latter, or insist on it being lateral.
> Lateral
> approximants may be dental, alveolar, postalveolar,
> retroflex, palatal, velar or uvular; in every instance the
> closure is made _within_ the mouth by the tongue with the
> airstream passing either on both sides or one side of the
> tongue.
>
> Claudio's velar lateral approximant is, thus perfectly
> possible, but is not common in the world's languages. It
> does, however, occur in some varieties of English in words
> like _fill_, _bill_ etc (Oh dear, not YAEPT!!) and has the
> IPA symbol [ʟ].
[ʟ] is a rare beast; apparently, it hardly occurs outside
New Guinea and neighbouring islands, but if Wikipedia says
it occurs in some dialects of English in words like _milk_,
I can't say it was not true! I am not an English
dialectologist.
> I do not know of any occurrence of the uvular lateral
> approximant, but clearly the IPA guys think it possible (as
> indeed it is) although no symbol has yet been assigned to it.
It is probably possible, but unattested in human languages.
--
... 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 (70)
________________________________________________________________________
1.2. Re: Labial lateral?
Posted by: "R A Brown" r...@carolandray.plus.com
Date: Mon Aug 6, 2012 12:29 am ((PDT))
On 05/08/2012 21:21, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
> Hallo conlangers!
>
> On Sunday 05 August 2012 16:51:15 R A Brown wrote:
[snip]
>>
>> I agree - I think it would be heard as a bilabial
>> approximant. But I do not think Claudio's "more
>> rigorous" pronunciation is a 'lateral approximant'.
>
> If the passage is off centre and no frication occurs, it
> is by definition a lateral approximant, I would say. But
> as I said above, it doesn't seem to sound much different
> from an ordinary [w], so I would not expect any language
> to contrast it against the latter, or insist on it being
> lateral.
In fact in version 2.1 of Liva, Claudio gives [w] as an
"allowed allophone" of the Liva's "labial lateral." But
this 'permission' appears to have been withdrawn in version 4.2.
I agree his "more rigorous" alternative in 4.2 is
indistinguishable in practice from ordinary [w].
[snip]
>> Claudio's velar lateral approximant is, thus perfectly
>> possible, but is not common in the world's languages.
>> It does, however, occur in some varieties of English in
>> words like _fill_, _bill_ etc (Oh dear, not YAEPT!!)
>> and has the IPA symbol [ʟ].
>
> [ʟ] is a rare beast; apparently, it hardly occurs
> outside New Guinea and neighbouring islands, but if
> Wikipedia says it occurs in some dialects of English in
> words like _milk_, I can't say it was not true! I am not
> an English dialectologist.
The most common pronunciation of the English "dark l" (i.e.
/l/ in a syllabic coda) is a velarized alveolar lateral. It
is a short step from there to a velar lateral. Where I
live (not so very far from London) it is commonly pronounce
[w], and some varieties of English actually vocalize it as
[ʊ] or [o]. The same sort of thing once went on in early
French as we see from spellings such as _beau_ (fem. belle),
_fou_ (fem. folle) etc.
IMO both Claudio's "labial lateral" and his velar lateral
could in practice sound very similar.
>
>> I do not know of any occurrence of the uvular lateral
>> approximant, but clearly the IPA guys think it possible
>> (as indeed it is) although no symbol has yet been
>> assigned to it.
>
> It is probably possible, but unattested in human
> languages.
...so far ;)
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.
[WELSH PROVERB]
Messages in this topic (70)
________________________________________________________________________
1.3. Re: Labial lateral?
Posted by: "Charles W Brickner" tepeyach...@embarqmail.com
Date: Mon Aug 6, 2012 3:52 am ((PDT))
>From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:conl...@listserv.brown.edu] On Behalf
>Of R A Brown
>Subject: Re: Labial lateral?
>Where I live (not so very far from London) it is commonly
>pronounce [w], and some varieties of English actually
>vocalize it as [ʊ] or [o].
Thanks for clearing that up! In watching British TV shows, I thought I was
hearing things.
Charlie
Messages in this topic (70)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2.1. Re: Transcription system for Books
Posted by: "Garth Wallace" gwa...@gmail.com
Date: Sun Aug 5, 2012 6:36 pm ((PDT))
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 5:44 AM, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Mon, 7/30/12, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhieme...@web.de> wrote:
>
>> (This means that for the Orionese, "music" and "poetry" are the
>> same art. There is no way divorcing the two.
>
>> Also, all music is strictly monophonic,
>> as chords and such would be the equivalent of several people
>> saying different things at the same time, and just as confusing.)
>
> Very interesting! Is this a cultural choice / evolution or is there some
> physiological reason? I guess they wouldn't like opera! Too many things
> going on at once.
I would think that polyphony, or things like hocket, could be a form
of wordplay.
Messages in this topic (55)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Persian and Sound Changes and Uzbek
Posted by: "Eamon Graham" eamoni...@yahoo.com
Date: Sun Aug 5, 2012 7:31 pm ((PDT))
Sorry everyone for the pointless e-mail; I sent when I meant to paste the link.
The link is:
http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/personal/agnes/upsala00.pdf
Eamon
Hello again,
It seems that much of the information I need to for sound changes from Old
Persian to Middle Persian to Modern Persian can be extrapolated from this
source:
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
Posted by: "Matthew A. Gurevitch" mag122...@aol.com
Date: Sun Aug 5, 2012 8:58 pm ((PDT))
Dear Conlangers,
With respect to the revival of Hebrew, the grammar is definitely influenced by
European languages the people who revived it spoke, such as the Germanic
Yiddish. Changes to grammar include change constructions showing possession
(Someone has something) in Biblical Hebrew have the possessed object in the
nominative and the possessor in the dative (ješ li ha-sepher יש לי הספר), but
under European influenced, the possessed looks accusative (ješ li et ha-sepher
יש לי את הספר), the disuse of the traditional plural feminine ending on verbs
in the future (still in use whenever the song צאנה צאנה צאנה Tzena, Tzena,
Tzena was written), a switch from showing possession by marking the possessed
item (שמלת הילדה simlat ha-jalda) to mainly showing it with a more isolating
structure (שמלה של הילדה simlah šel ha-jalda), disuse of the allative (סדומה
sdoma, meaning to Sdom), reanalyzing Biblical aspect as tense marking, and
others.
Hebrew revival had more going for it than just a grammar that was familiar to
speakers, but rather social pressures to adopt a new language (moving people
who spoke many languages, many of which they felt like they needed to abandon
to achieve political independence, into contact). Most of the changes to
grammar were not intentional, but rather happened because of the speakers'
native languages.
One huge difference between Hebrew revival and other revival movements is the
component of immersion. I saw a short clip on teaching Welsh in schools that
pointed out that a majority of the people in Welsh-speaking schools do not use
it outside of the classroom. To revive a language, there does not only have to
be education in the language, but also a need to use it.
--Matthew Gurevitch
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Everson <ever...@evertype.com>
To: CONLANG <conl...@listserv.brown.edu>
Sent: Sun, Aug 5, 2012 5:13 am
Subject: Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
Cornish began its revival in 1904.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
Posted by: "R A Brown" r...@carolandray.plus.com
Date: Mon Aug 6, 2012 12:52 am ((PDT))
On 06/08/2012 04:58, Matthew A. Gurevitch wrote:
> Dear Conlangers,
[snip]
>
> One huge difference between Hebrew revival and other
> revival movements is the component of immersion. I saw a
> short clip on teaching Welsh in schools that pointed out
> that a majority of the people in Welsh-speaking schools
> do not use it outside of the classroom.
As one who once lived for 22 years in Wales, I find this
difficult to believe - especially in the Welsh-speaking
areas of Wales!
Even in the anglophone areas, the use of Welsh has increased
since I moved there in 1968.
> To revive a language,
A language has to be dead in order to be revived; Welsh has
never been dead.
> there does not only have to be education in the language,
> but also a need to use it.
A need may help, but it ain't necessary. What IMO is
necessary is the *desire*, for ......
On 05/08/2012 10:13, Michael Everson wrote:
> Cornish began its revival in 1904.
Indeed it did - but there was no need for it. Everyone in
Cornwall could and did speak English (unlike Wales where in
1904 there were certainly monoglot Welsh speakers).
It was the _desire_ to revive the language that drove Henry
Jenner, who wrote:
"The reason why a Cornishman should learn Cornish, the
outward and audible sign of his separate nationality, is
sentimental, and not in the least practical, and if
everything sentimental were banished from it, the world
would not be as pleasant a place as it is."
Since his time the same desire has enthused others. It is
estimated that there are now some 2000 people fluent in the
language (some estimates go as high as 3000) and there are
certainly now L1 speakers of Cornish.
There is still, however, no need, in the utilitarian sense,
to speak the language. It is a desire to preserve something
from extinction. The same desire that has led Jessie Little
Doe Baird to revive the Massachusett language and many other
language revivalists around the world.
Long may it continue to do so.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
CENEDL HEB IAITH, CENEDL HEB GALON.
(A nation without a language is a
nation without a heart)
[Welsh proverb]
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
4c. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
Posted by: "Michael Everson" ever...@evertype.com
Date: Mon Aug 6, 2012 1:48 am ((PDT))
On 6 Aug 2012, at 08:52, R A Brown wrote:
> On 05/08/2012 10:13, Michael Everson wrote:
>> Cornish began its revival in 1904.
>
> Indeed it did - but there was no need for it. Everyone in Cornwall could and
> did speak English (unlike Wales where in 1904 there were certainly monoglot
> Welsh speakers).
There was no "need" to revive Hebrew: Yiddish could have become the language of
Israel. (Devil's advocate there.)
> It is estimated that there are now some 2000 people fluent in the language
> (some estimates go as high as 3000) and there are certainly now L1 speakers
> of Cornish.
These numbers are just wrong. The number of truly fluent people is about 50. I
do know two L1 speakers of Cornish. Their father spoke only Cornish to them,
their mother English (though she speaks Cornish as well). Some thousands have
had some exposure to the language, but there really aren't 2,000 fluent
speakers.
> There is still, however, no need, in the utilitarian sense, to speak the
> language. It is a desire to preserve something from extinction.
Henry Jenner: "Why should Cornishmen learn Cornish? There is no money in it, it
serves no practical purpose, and the literature is scanty and of no great
originality or value. The question is a fair one, the answer is simple. Because
they are Cornish."
I do what I can to support the Revival: http://www.evertype.com/cornish.html
Michael Everson
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
4d. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
Posted by: "R A Brown" r...@carolandray.plus.com
Date: Mon Aug 6, 2012 2:21 am ((PDT))
On 06/08/2012 09:48, Michael Everson wrote:
> On 6 Aug 2012, at 08:52, R A Brown wrote:
>
>> On 05/08/2012 10:13, Michael Everson wrote:
>>> Cornish began its revival in 1904.
>>
>> Indeed it did - but there was no need for it. Everyone
>> in Cornwall could and did speak English (unlike Wales
>> where in 1904 there were certainly monoglot Welsh
>> speakers).
>
> There was no "need" to revive Hebrew: Yiddish could have
> become the language of Israel. (Devil's advocate
> there.)
..or Ladino ;)
But would either a medieval German derivative or medieval
Spanish derivative have given the new nation a heart?
>> It is estimated that there are now some 2000 people
>> fluent in the language (some estimates go as high as
>> 3000) and there are certainly now L1 speakers of
>> Cornish.
>
> These numbers are just wrong. The number of truly fluent
> people is about 50.
I stand corrected - I thought 2000 sounded a little
optimistic. But that's still 50 more than there _need_ be
(but still IMO worryingly on the low side after 100 years).
> I do know two L1 speakers of Cornish. Their father spoke
> only Cornish to them, their mother English (though she
> speaks Cornish as well).
I have hear of others. But young L1 speakers of a language
can sadly lose that language if it is not maintained.
> Some thousands have had some exposure to the language,
> but there really aren't 2,000 fluent speakers.
OK.
>> There is still, however, no need, in the utilitarian
>> sense, to speak the language. It is a desire to
>> preserve something from extinction.
>
> Henry Jenner: "Why should Cornishmen learn Cornish? There
> is no money in it, it serves no practical purpose, and
> the literature is scanty and of no great originality or
> value. The question is a fair one, the answer is simple.
> Because they are Cornish."
Yep - the reason, I guess that Jessie Little Doe Baird works
to revive the Massachusett language within the Wampanoag
nation more than a century after the language was last
spoken. Both Henry Jenner & Jessie Little Doe Baird want to
get the heart of their nations beating
again :)
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
CENEDL HEB IAITH, CENEDL HEB GALON.
(A nation without a language is a
nation without a heart)
[Welsh proverb]
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
4e. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" lytl...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Aug 6, 2012 3:17 am ((PDT))
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 5:21 AM, R A Brown <r...@carolandray.plus.com> wrote:
> On 06/08/2012 09:48, Michael Everson wrote:
>
>> On 6 Aug 2012, at 08:52, R A Brown wrote:
>> ...
>
>
> There is still, however, no need, in the utilitarian
>>> sense, to speak the language. It is a desire to
>>> preserve something from extinction.
>>>
>>
>> Henry Jenner: "Why should Cornishmen learn Cornish? There
>> is no money in it, it serves no practical purpose, and
>> the literature is scanty and of no great originality or
>> value. The question is a fair one, the answer is simple.
>> Because they are Cornish."
>>
>
> Yep - the reason, I guess that Jessie Little Doe Baird works
> to revive the Massachusett language within the Wampanoag
> nation more than a century after the language was last
> spoken. Both Henry Jenner & Jessie Little Doe Baird want to
> get the heart of their nations beating
> again :)
>
>
> I find it very disheartening that people think they belong (or want to
belong) to a nation. What is a nation, that people should want to belong to
one? A language? A culture? A legal entity with government and borders?
stevo
> --
> Ray
>
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
4f. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
Posted by: "A. da Mek" a.da_m...@ufoni.cz
Date: Mon Aug 6, 2012 3:52 am ((PDT))
> What is a nation, that people should want to belong to
> one? A language? A culture? A legal entity with government and borders?
All of them.
Primarily a language, and it implies a culture, because the people speaking
by the same language probably were told the same stories, has read the same
books and has seen the same plays and films.
And without borders, any language is doomed to die. Albeit for two cultures
living in the same area, the religion can serve as a substitute of natural
borders, this unavoidably means a hate between them, whereas in the case of
borders (especially well defined natural borders, as in the case of a nation
living on an island or in a drainage basin of a river), the proverb "good
fences make good neighbours" can be valid.
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
4g. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
Posted by: "R A Brown" r...@carolandray.plus.com
Date: Mon Aug 6, 2012 4:12 am ((PDT))
On 06/08/2012 11:52, A. da Mek wrote:
>> What is a nation, that people should want to belong to
>> one? A language? A culture? A legal entity with
>> government and borders?
>
> All of them.
That's arguable - but a whole thick tome could be written
discussing that, so I'll leave it (also it's off topic and
will certainly get into the NC bit of NCNC).
> Primarily a language, and it implies a
> culture, because the people speaking by the same
> language probably were told the same stories, has read
> the same books and has seen the same plays and films. And
> without borders, any language is doomed to die.
A good thing both Wales and Cornwall have defined borders,
then ;)
Hey! I'm using up my five-a-day mailing allowance.
PS - I hope the Welsh proverb can be treated just a Welsh
proverb. However, if it is felt that it offends the NCNC
convention, I will remove it.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
CENEDL HEB IAITH, CENEDL HEB GALON.
(A nation without a language is a
nation without a heart)
[Welsh proverb]
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
4h. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
Posted by: "A. da Mek" a.da_m...@ufoni.cz
Date: Mon Aug 6, 2012 5:28 am ((PDT))
> I'll leave it (also it's off topic and will certainly get into the NC bit
> of NCNC).
I was just thinking too that this could be perceived off-topic and also
breaking the good old NCNC rule, but OTOH the language is so essential to a
nation as DNA is to a species.
As a new species can be formed only if a subspecies is in a isolation
(geographical or ecological), so a language (and its culture and nation) can
exist only if its speakers are isolated, either geographically (having a
national state or at least so much autonomy that they can prevent a mass
immigration) or otherwise (religion (and other worldview), phenotype, etc.).
(BTW, maybe it could be useful to have a separate ConCross&Crown mail-list
for such controversial topics.)
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
4i. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Mon Aug 6, 2012 7:21 am ((PDT))
--- On Mon, 8/6/12, A. da Mek <a.da_m...@ufoni.cz> wrote:
> From: A. da Mek <a.da_m...@ufoni.cz>
> Subject: Re: [CONLANG] Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
> To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
> Date: Monday, August 6, 2012, 8:27 AM
> > I'll leave it (also it's off topic and will certainly get into the NC
> > bit of NCNC).
>
> I was just thinking too that this could be perceived
> off-topic and also breaking the good old NCNC rule, but OTOH
> the language is so essential to a nation as DNA is to a
> species.
Quite possibly. But then there are languages, like English, that get
along anywhere, seeping into the crevices of any culture they contact. It
leaches and infects in equal measure.
> As a new species can be formed only if a subspecies is in a
> isolation (geographical or ecological), so a language (and
> its culture and nation) can exist only if its speakers are
> isolated, either geographically (having a national state or
> at least so much autonomy that they can prevent a mass
> immigration) or otherwise (religion (and other worldview),
> phenotype, etc.).
English is quite the opposite: it developed in anything but a vacuum
and has thriven in an expansive, imperialist, mercantile, exploratory
milieu. It got its start as a fusion of immigrant tribal languages in
a foreign land. Its country was conquered in turn, it survived the
conquest and in turn became the language of the conquerors. It eventually
was exported in massive quantities to all corners of the world, becoming
a highly useful L2 or even L1 within cultures far removed from its
Germanic and Anglo-Saxon roots.
It's like slime. It gets into everything and is terribly difficult to
muck out.
> (BTW, maybe it could be useful to have a separate
> ConCross&Crown mail-list for such controversial topics.)
Such things, at least as far as they conlinguistical in nature, are more
than welcome here. Otherwise, the Conculure list is entirely appropriate
for constructed religions, politics, languages and cultural wossnames.
Padraic
Messages in this topic (13)
________________________________________________________________________
4j. Re: Reviving dying languages through conlanging?
Posted by: "Dustfinger Batailleur" dustfinge...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Aug 6, 2012 7:24 am ((PDT))
Erm... What about Creoles?
On 6 August 2012 08:27, A. da Mek <a.da_m...@ufoni.cz> wrote:
>
> I was just thinking too that this could be perceived off-topic and also
> breaking the good old NCNC rule, but OTOH the language is so essential to a
> nation as DNA is to a species.
> As a new species can be formed only if a subspecies is in a isolation
> (geographical or ecological), so a language (and its culture and nation)
> can exist only if its speakers are isolated, either geographically (having
> a national state or at least so much autonomy that they can prevent a mass
> immigration) or otherwise (religion (and other worldview), phenotype, etc.).
>
Messages in this topic (13)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
