May 3, 2007 Response to Martin's point about the cross-references: I went back and checked cross-reference examples. There is no difference between a link introduced by xr ‘See’ and one introduced by ‘cf’. So the second cross-reference type should be re-encoded using an xr-tag. Do you do this, Martin, or do I? 2.Question about lack of documentation of phr type=”phonemic/narrow” which are found in dictegs: Martin, we discussed this in December. See Blog of 18/12/06 Decisions. In Kinkade’s database some of the illustrations are transcribed phonetically and some are transcribed phonemically. So we decided to add phr type=”phonemic/narrow” in order to allow for phonemicization of the dicteg forms when necessary. 3. Editing Decisions concerning Conflation of Entries in Affix.xml file: As I have been going through the Affix.xml file, I have been making editing decisions about entries. Specifically, throughout this file there are entries which Kinkade listed as separate suffixes on his filecards, but which in fact are either 1) allomorphs of one affix, rather than affixes in their own right, or 2) combinations of two affixes which Kinkade analyzed as a separate affix. In the first case, an example is the ‘inchoative’ affix which has two allomorphs -?- and -p. These were listed as separate affixes in Kinkade’s affix filecards, and were therefore typed into the computer database as separate affixes. However, Kinkade himself did consider these to be allomorphs of one affix. Similarly with ?ac-/c-. With cases of this kind, I have listed both forms of the affix under one xml:id entry, but have indicated that there are allomorphs of the affix. And I have also placed all the illustrations of all the allomorphs together into one entry. Thus, for instance, all -?- and -p cases are in one xml:id entry. In the second case, an example is words containing the causative morpheme -stu. In addition to the fact that this morpheme has different stressed and unstressed allomorphs, it is also found in combination with other suffixes. For example, -stu-m occurs in the data, as does -stu-n(n). Kinkade listed both -stu-m and -stunn as separate suffixes in the filecards, but his later analyses indicate that he perceived these sequences as combinations of affixes. With cases of this kind, I have moved the illustrations that Kinkade had for -stum and -stunn into the -stu xml:id entry. I have noted that I did this in the database itself, just to keep track, but these notes can be erased eventually. (I used the tag to make the note). I finished the feature structures and conflation of entries up to the end of afix7.hmg.wrk (paper) file. Start on the -t suffix entry next time.