* Roger Mills said on 2001-03-20 18:52:57 +0100
> From another (ahem, serious) list, I received the following inquiry,
> which might be of conlang interest, too, as it covers areas of
> vocabulary often overlooked. Obviously if your conpeople are not
> anthropoid, some entries may not apply (as "earlobe" DNA in Kash).
Uh, what's the definition of "minor body parts"? The less important? Do
you have urls/isbn or similar to the mysterious David Wilkins (1996)?
> "...a typological study of the way in which terms for minor body
> [parts] and bodily effluvia are lexicalized, expanding on the work
> done by David Wilkins (1996) in similar semantic domains. I am
> especially interested in which terms have a monomorphemic or literal
> gloss and which are multimorphemic and/or figurative."
t.