Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

"This isn't brain surgery; it's just television." -- David Letterman


tech / sci.lang / The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

SubjectAuthor
* The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
+- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01DKleinecke
+- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01DKleinecke
`* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01DKleinecke
 `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  +- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Athel Cornish-Bowden
  +* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Peter T. Daniels
  |+* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  ||`* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Peter T. Daniels
  || `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  ||  +- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01DKleinecke
  ||  `- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Daud Deden
  |`* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  | `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Peter T. Daniels
  |  `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  |   `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Ruud Harmsen
  |    +* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Peter T. Daniels
  |    |`* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  |    | `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Ruud Harmsen
  |    |  +- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Peter T. Daniels
  |    |  `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  |    |   `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Ruud Harmsen
  |    |    `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Peter T. Daniels
  |    |     `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  |    |      +- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Peter T. Daniels
  |    |      +* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Ruud Harmsen
  |    |      |`* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  |    |      | `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Peter T. Daniels
  |    |      |  `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  |    |      |   +- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Peter T. Daniels
  |    |      |   `- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01André G. Isaak
  |    |      `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Mikko
  |    |       `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  |    |        +- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Ruud Harmsen
  |    |        `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Peter T. Daniels
  |    |         `- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  |    `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  |     `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Ruud Harmsen
  |      `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet
  |       `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Ruud Harmsen
  |        +- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Ruud Harmsen
  |        `- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Peter T. Daniels
  `* Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01DKleinecke
   `- Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01Arnaud Fournet

Pages:12
The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14508&group=sci.lang#14508

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1c1a:b0:2ee:d7fc:c272 with SMTP id bq26-20020a05622a1c1a00b002eed7fcc272mr818493qtb.557.1650061307253;
Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:21:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:159f:b0:2f9:45cc:1de5 with SMTP id
t31-20020a056808159f00b002f945cc1de5mr420898oiw.275.1650061306999; Fri, 15
Apr 2022 15:21:46 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:21:46 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:90a9:6ff7:4ce5:ae10;
posting-account=aSvcbwoAAADuTTuNpgwK5PoqH8BpbsBl
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:90a9:6ff7:4ce5:ae10
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: fournet....@wanadoo.fr (Arnaud Fournet)
Injection-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 22:21:47 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 238
 by: Arnaud Fournet - Fri, 15 Apr 2022 22:21 UTC

For those of you who hate Academia.edu:
0. Why Copernicus ?

Nicolaus Copernicus (19 February 1473 – 24 May 1543) is well-known for initiating a conceptual change in the modelization of the Solar system and, more generally, of the Universe. The Copernican model displaced the geocentric paradigm of Ptolemy, which had prevailed for centuries and initially placed the Earth at the center of the Universe. Copernican heliocentrism was developed by Nicolaus Copernicus and was first published in 1543. It established that Planet Earth was not the center around which the other celestial bodies were rotating, but that the Sun was the center of the Solar system, around which the planets – including the Earth – were rotating.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_heliocentrism

In other words, Copernicus established that the Earth was neither the center of the Universe nor the center of the Solar system. His model was a breakaway from the previous premises embedded in the geocentric model of Ptolemy..
In my billets d’humeur, I usually tackle concrete issues about a particular (proto)language, family or theory.
In my Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus, I will explain what macro-comparative endeavors should be or do and I will describe what historical and comparative linguistics in the 21st century should get rid of.
1. What to get rid of (urgently)

1. To oversimplify, there are two major schools currently working on Nostratic issues: (1) The American school with Joseph Greenberg (1915–2001) and Allan R. Bomhard, (2) the Russian school – aka the Starostin Circus – with [the Russian] Sergei Anatolyević Starostin (1953–2005) and [the American] John D. Bengtson, among many others. I am possibly my own third school, but for the time being, sum vox clamantis in semi-deserto. Another free electron is Václav Blažek. Another interesting figure might be Vitali Viktorović Ševoroškin.
By an oddly improvized international Division of Labor, the American school tends to work mostly on Indo-European and its putative close relatives. Greenberg’s Eurasiatic and Bomhard’s “Nostratic” are basically extended Indo-European, even though Bomhard does not like my description of his “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European (see below). On the other hand, the Russian school tends to work mostly on the lump of languages called Sino-NaDene-Caucasic. This Division of Labor is an over-simplication of reality, as Greenberg also worked on Amerindian and “Indo-Pacific” languages, while the Russian school produces papers, wordlists and monographs on a large variety of languages (African, etc). It can also be noted that Roger M. Blench produces sketches on lesser-known and endangered languages from Africa or India. Needless to emphasize that all these descriptive works (either by Blench or the Starostin Circus) are highly precious.

2. On the whole, the American and Russian schools agree on a number of toxic idiocies. The worst of these toxic idiocies is the notion that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan. This toxic idiocy must urgently be dismissed.
Among other objections, it must be underlined that Sino-Tibetan is not a clear and valid genetic node, in the first place. Needless to say that grafting more groups like NE Caucasic onto a probably invalid ST lump does not help.
Quite clearly, Basque and NE Caucasic are closely related, as is shown by Bengtson (2017) – be it more or less adequately et avec plus ou moins de bonheur... – but the fact is no less clear that Euskaro-Caucasic is more closely related to IEan than to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan. Let’s put it simple: the Sino-NaDene-Caucasic lump is demented garbage.
There are certainly several reasons why the relationship of IEan and Euskaro-Caucasic is not correctly recognized.
The first obstacle is that Caucasology per se is not an easy field to get acquainted with and necessitates to speak or at least be able to read several languages (like Russian, German, etc). Besides, the reference work on Caucasic (NE+NW) – produced by S. Starostin and Nikolayev (Севернокавказский этимологический словарь, A Comparative Dictionary of North Caucasian Languages 1994) – is far from being reliable, especially as regards the reconstructions, which can be described as wildly overcreative, to remain polite. We can nevertheless be grateful that the materials are available and searchable at Starling.ru.

3. Another toxic idiocy, on which the American and Russian schools agree, is the number of series of stops posited for Nostratic. Even though they bicker about the phonetic nature of the series, they agree that the number should be three. I emphatically assert that this figure is doubtless false. Nostratic had two series: presumably a voiceless series and a voiced series. The glottalized series is a fiction. For that matter, the model of “Nostratic” proposed by Bomhard is flawed from the start. Many of his proposed sets of comparanda are false, and what is worse, many potential cognates are missing. On the whole, the most acceptable data in Bomhard are those involving voiceless (his th) and voiced (his dh) stops, plus liquids or nasals, and to a lesser extent laryngeals. One reason I describe Bomhard’s “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European is that he erroneously projects the three series of PIE onto an extended perimeter of languages. This procedure is false, as I already criticized in 2010.
https://diachronica.pagesperso-orange.fr/TMCJ_vol_1.1_Fournet_Review_of_Bomhard_2008.pdf
“Nostratic” as proposed by Bomhard or the Starostin Circus can be described as a dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm. It contains two major and irremediable flaws: three series, retroprojected from PIE, and the gap between Caucasic and IEan. This dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm is worse than Ptolemy’s geocentric model, because the latter did not propose a dislocated world. Removing these two major flaws is the Copernican revolution I propose and will implement, hopefully with the help of other linguists.

4. True enough, several groups currently have three series of consonants (or more). But the fact is each group (IEan, Kartvelian, NE Caucasic, etc.) developped additional series – each group on its own – out of a more simple state of language, that had only two series. One of the urgent tasks of macrocomparison is to elucidate and describe how the additional series emerged in each group of Nostratic. Once this is done (presumably I’ll do it in the coming months or years), the relationship of IEan with NE Caucasic will become crystal clear.

5. Another toxic idiocy that cripples macrocomparison is the myth or dogma that, after some time, say 5,000 or 10,000 years, macrocomparison would allegedly become impossible. This dogma, propagandized by obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin, is just plainly false. They have no expertise nor experience in macrocomparison. Don’t expect a marxist to explain Latin mass.

6. Another toxic idiocy is the creationist isolationist bunker, in which the Indo-Europeanist crooks claim PIE has no close nor distant relatives, no ancestors, and Indo-European languages spread in a vacuum, having no substrates. This cryptonazi indo-germanisch myth must be eliminated.
2. What to get rid of (slowly)

7. It can be observed – en passant – that promoters of a connection between Burušaski and Yenisseian, like Bengtson or Blažek, have never published a side-by-side basic wordlist of both groups. As a matter of fact, both groups share about nothing. The inclusion of Yenisseian in Euskaro-Caucasic is highly dubious.

8. Another problem is Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth, on which Greenberg’s Eurasiatic is based to a large extent. IEan is not a Siberian agglutinative language. For that matter, it has nothing to do with languages of the Ural-Altaic type. The MeTu myth is to a large extent a pareidolic delusion. Needless to say that there is nothing good to expect from the maximally head-shrunken wordlist: me, tu, one, two, three, dog, salt, à la Starostin-Yakhontov.

9. To some extent, basic wordlists are an issue, especially when used in the most idiotic way, as the head-shrinking Starostin Circus routinely does. Basic wordlists should be used for comparative purposes, not for unreliable glottochronological calculations. It is just wondrous that the Starostin Circus calculates a 6,000 year distance between Hurrito-Urartian and NE Caucasic languages, when Hurrito-Urartian is not a member of NE Caucasic in the first place.

10. A reliable laryngeal-oriented reconstruction of Proto-Uralic is in urgent need. Regrettably the most competent Uralicists stick to a retarded vowel-oriented Pokornyan format. Besides, one needs to understand why Samoyedic shares only 250 words with Finno-Ugric. This is unbelievably low. I suspect that a number of metatheses occurred in Finno-Ugric that blur cognacy, with both Samoyedic and Nostratic. For example, (only FU) *walk- is possibly from *lawk- ‘white’, or (only FU) *witti ‘five’ from *tiw-ti ‘the big (thumb)’, or (only FU) *wed- ‘to kill’ from *dhew- ‘to die’. The *CvW- pattern underwent metathesis in FU, certainly, some other patterns also did. I expect the number of shared cognates will increase, once the metatheses in FU have been described.

To summarize, the Copernican prerequisites for Nostratic studies are:

- dismiss the toxic idiocy that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan.
- dismiss the toxic idiocy that Nostratic would have three series of stops, instead of two (as I propose).
- elucidate the phonetics paths of each group, out of a simple state of language, that had only two series.
- dismiss Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth.
- dismiss the dogma that only shallow-dating comparisons are possible.
- ignore obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin.


Click here to read the complete article
Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<e646dd4a-b64d-413c-a067-761576c10b7cn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14513&group=sci.lang#14513

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4014:b0:69c:10af:d98e with SMTP id h20-20020a05620a401400b0069c10afd98emr1249093qko.633.1650089197587;
Fri, 15 Apr 2022 23:06:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:1386:b0:2d9:a01a:488a with SMTP id
c6-20020a056808138600b002d9a01a488amr2976602oiw.213.1650089197147; Fri, 15
Apr 2022 23:06:37 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 23:06:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.208.151.23; posting-account=7Xc2EwkAAABXMcQfERYamr3b-64IkBws
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.208.151.23
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <e646dd4a-b64d-413c-a067-761576c10b7cn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: dkleine...@gmail.com (DKleinecke)
Injection-Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2022 06:06:37 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 by: DKleinecke - Sat, 16 Apr 2022 06:06 UTC

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 3:21:48 PM UTC-7, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> For those of you who hate Academia.edu:
> 0. Why Copernicus ?
>
> Nicolaus Copernicus (19 February 1473 – 24 May 1543) is well-known for initiating a conceptual change in the modelization of the Solar system and, more generally, of the Universe. The Copernican model displaced the geocentric paradigm of Ptolemy, which had prevailed for centuries and initially placed the Earth at the center of the Universe. Copernican heliocentrism was developed by Nicolaus Copernicus and was first published in 1543. It established that Planet Earth was not the center around which the other celestial bodies were rotating, but that the Sun was the center of the Solar system, around which the planets – including the Earth – were rotating.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_heliocentrism
>
> In other words, Copernicus established that the Earth was neither the center of the Universe nor the center of the Solar system. His model was a breakaway from the previous premises embedded in the geocentric model of Ptolemy.
> In my billets d’humeur, I usually tackle concrete issues about a particular (proto)language, family or theory.
> In my Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus, I will explain what macro-comparative endeavors should be or do and I will describe what historical and comparative linguistics in the 21st century should get rid of.
> 1. What to get rid of (urgently)
>
> 1. To oversimplify, there are two major schools currently working on Nostratic issues: (1) The American school with Joseph Greenberg (1915–2001) and Allan R. Bomhard, (2) the Russian school – aka the Starostin Circus – with [the Russian] Sergei Anatolyević Starostin (1953–2005) and [the American] John D. Bengtson, among many others. I am possibly my own third school, but for the time being, sum vox clamantis in semi-deserto. Another free electron is Václav Blažek. Another interesting figure might be Vitali Viktorović Ševoroškin.
> By an oddly improvized international Division of Labor, the American school tends to work mostly on Indo-European and its putative close relatives. Greenberg’s Eurasiatic and Bomhard’s “Nostratic” are basically extended Indo-European, even though Bomhard does not like my description of his “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European (see below). On the other hand, the Russian school tends to work mostly on the lump of languages called Sino-NaDene-Caucasic. This Division of Labor is an over-simplication of reality, as Greenberg also worked on Amerindian and “Indo-Pacific” languages, while the Russian school produces papers, wordlists and monographs on a large variety of languages (African, etc). It can also be noted that Roger M. Blench produces sketches on lesser-known and endangered languages from Africa or India. Needless to emphasize that all these descriptive works (either by Blench or the Starostin Circus) are highly precious.
>
> 2. On the whole, the American and Russian schools agree on a number of toxic idiocies. The worst of these toxic idiocies is the notion that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan. This toxic idiocy must urgently be dismissed.
> Among other objections, it must be underlined that Sino-Tibetan is not a clear and valid genetic node, in the first place. Needless to say that grafting more groups like NE Caucasic onto a probably invalid ST lump does not help.
> Quite clearly, Basque and NE Caucasic are closely related, as is shown by Bengtson (2017) – be it more or less adequately et avec plus ou moins de bonheur... – but the fact is no less clear that Euskaro-Caucasic is more closely related to IEan than to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan. Let’s put it simple: the Sino-NaDene-Caucasic lump is demented garbage..
> There are certainly several reasons why the relationship of IEan and Euskaro-Caucasic is not correctly recognized.
> The first obstacle is that Caucasology per se is not an easy field to get acquainted with and necessitates to speak or at least be able to read several languages (like Russian, German, etc). Besides, the reference work on Caucasic (NE+NW) – produced by S. Starostin and Nikolayev (Севернокавказский этимологический словарь, A Comparative Dictionary of North Caucasian Languages 1994) – is far from being reliable, especially as regards the reconstructions, which can be described as wildly overcreative, to remain polite. We can nevertheless be grateful that the materials are available and searchable at Starling.ru.
>
> 3. Another toxic idiocy, on which the American and Russian schools agree, is the number of series of stops posited for Nostratic. Even though they bicker about the phonetic nature of the series, they agree that the number should be three. I emphatically assert that this figure is doubtless false. Nostratic had two series: presumably a voiceless series and a voiced series.. The glottalized series is a fiction. For that matter, the model of “Nostratic” proposed by Bomhard is flawed from the start. Many of his proposed sets of comparanda are false, and what is worse, many potential cognates are missing. On the whole, the most acceptable data in Bomhard are those involving voiceless (his th) and voiced (his dh) stops, plus liquids or nasals, and to a lesser extent laryngeals. One reason I describe Bomhard’s “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European is that he erroneously projects the three series of PIE onto an extended perimeter of languages. This procedure is false, as I already criticized in 2010.
> https://diachronica.pagesperso-orange.fr/TMCJ_vol_1.1_Fournet_Review_of_Bomhard_2008.pdf
> “Nostratic” as proposed by Bomhard or the Starostin Circus can be described as a dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm. It contains two major and irremediable flaws: three series, retroprojected from PIE, and the gap between Caucasic and IEan. This dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm is worse than Ptolemy’s geocentric model, because the latter did not propose a dislocated world. Removing these two major flaws is the Copernican revolution I propose and will implement, hopefully with the help of other linguists.
>
> 4. True enough, several groups currently have three series of consonants (or more). But the fact is each group (IEan, Kartvelian, NE Caucasic, etc.) developped additional series – each group on its own – out of a more simple state of language, that had only two series. One of the urgent tasks of macrocomparison is to elucidate and describe how the additional series emerged in each group of Nostratic. Once this is done (presumably I’ll do it in the coming months or years), the relationship of IEan with NE Caucasic will become crystal clear.
>
> 5. Another toxic idiocy that cripples macrocomparison is the myth or dogma that, after some time, say 5,000 or 10,000 years, macrocomparison would allegedly become impossible. This dogma, propagandized by obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin, is just plainly false.. They have no expertise nor experience in macrocomparison. Don’t expect a marxist to explain Latin mass.
>
> 6. Another toxic idiocy is the creationist isolationist bunker, in which the Indo-Europeanist crooks claim PIE has no close nor distant relatives, no ancestors, and Indo-European languages spread in a vacuum, having no substrates. This cryptonazi indo-germanisch myth must be eliminated.
> 2. What to get rid of (slowly)
>
> 7. It can be observed – en passant – that promoters of a connection between Burušaski and Yenisseian, like Bengtson or Blažek, have never published a side-by-side basic wordlist of both groups. As a matter of fact, both groups share about nothing. The inclusion of Yenisseian in Euskaro-Caucasic is highly dubious.
>
> 8. Another problem is Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth, on which Greenberg’s Eurasiatic is based to a large extent. IEan is not a Siberian agglutinative language. For that matter, it has nothing to do with languages of the Ural-Altaic type. The MeTu myth is to a large extent a pareidolic delusion. Needless to say that there is nothing good to expect from the maximally head-shrunken wordlist: me, tu, one, two, three, dog, salt, à la Starostin-Yakhontov.
>
> 9. To some extent, basic wordlists are an issue, especially when used in the most idiotic way, as the head-shrinking Starostin Circus routinely does.. Basic wordlists should be used for comparative purposes, not for unreliable glottochronological calculations. It is just wondrous that the Starostin Circus calculates a 6,000 year distance between Hurrito-Urartian and NE Caucasic languages, when Hurrito-Urartian is not a member of NE Caucasic in the first place.
>
> 10. A reliable laryngeal-oriented reconstruction of Proto-Uralic is in urgent need. Regrettably the most competent Uralicists stick to a retarded vowel-oriented Pokornyan format. Besides, one needs to understand why Samoyedic shares only 250 words with Finno-Ugric. This is unbelievably low. I suspect that a number of metatheses occurred in Finno-Ugric that blur cognacy, with both Samoyedic and Nostratic. For example, (only FU) *walk- is possibly from *lawk- ‘white’, or (only FU) *witti ‘five’ from *tiw-ti ‘the big (thumb)’, or (only FU) *wed- ‘to kill’ from *dhew- ‘to die’. The *CvW- pattern underwent metathesis in FU, certainly, some other patterns also did. I expect the number of shared cognates will increase, once the metatheses in FU have been described.
>
> To summarize, the Copernican prerequisites for Nostratic studies are:
>
> - dismiss the toxic idiocy that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan.
> - dismiss the toxic idiocy that Nostratic would have three series of stops, instead of two (as I propose).
> - elucidate the phonetics paths of each group, out of a simple state of language, that had only two series.
> - dismiss Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth.
> - dismiss the dogma that only shallow-dating comparisons are possible.
> - ignore obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin.
>
>
>  
> 3. A few definitions
>
> PIXA : Proto-Exo-African. According to archeology and paleoanthropology, some 60-50,000 years ago, “modern” man stepped out of Africa and began to spread in Eurasia and beyond. At present, it is not possible to determine if PIXA was a single language, or if there is more than one PIXA, for example PIXA1 would have crossed the Sinai and PIXA2 would have crossed the Red Sea and reached the south of the Arabic Peninsula. The parsimonious hypothesis is that there is only one PIXA.
> It is unclear at this point how many branches PIXA has. Two clear branches are Post-Rhotic and NW Pre-Rhotic.
>
> Nostratic : a broad synonym for “Proto-World”. PIXA is technically more precise, for non-African languages.
> Nostratic has at least two branches: PIXA and PENA (= Proto-Endo-African). It is unclear at this point how many branches of PENA exist. Chamito-Semitic (or Afrasian) is one of them.
>
> PIE : Proto-Indo-European, the ancestor of Post-Anatolian and Anatolian languages.
> IPS : Improved Proto-Sanskrit, the great-daughter of PIE, fraudulently sold as being PIE by the Indo-Europeanist crooks.
>
> Post-Rhotic : at some point, inherited *-s- changed to -r-, word-medially and word-finally in the prehistory of PIE. This group includes PIE, Hurrito-Urartian and Sumerian.
>
> NW Pre-Rhotic : this is a short name than Euskaro-Caucasic for the family including Basque, Caucasic (NE+NW), Burušaski, and probably also Siouan.
>
> Macro-Kartvelian : includes Kartvelian and, probably Etruscan and a good deal of Pre-Greek.
>
>
> 4. What PIXA looked like
>
> The following system (of 24 phonemes) is my reference for PIXA :
>
> 1. Obstruents: p t ǩ k (voiceless stops)
> bh dh ğh gh (voiced stops)
> s / z c / ʒ (sʒibilants)
> 2. Resonants: m n (nasals)
> w y l
> (d)ɮ (t)ɬ (lateral fricatives)
> 3. Laryngeals:
> velars H2- [ḫ] H2+ [ġ]
> pharyngeals H1 [ḥ] H3 [ˁ]
> glottals H4 [ˀ]
>
> Each branch of Nostratic has its own phonetic signature as regards especially the sʒibilants and lateral fricatives.
> As can be seen, PIXA did not have a phoneme *r. For that matter, each branch of Nostratic developped /r/ out of a different inherited phoneme. These phenomena: sʒibilants, lateral fricatives and /r/ are of utmost relevance and importance.
>
>
> (to be continued)


Click here to read the complete article
Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<c24231b1-d9fa-4bcb-ab0d-ff8f10299aecn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14514&group=sci.lang#14514

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1023:b0:69b:fcca:479e with SMTP id a3-20020a05620a102300b0069bfcca479emr1233381qkk.645.1650089226272;
Fri, 15 Apr 2022 23:07:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:1201:b0:2f9:ef08:1a4f with SMTP id
a1-20020a056808120100b002f9ef081a4fmr976346oil.192.1650089226044; Fri, 15 Apr
2022 23:07:06 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 23:07:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.208.151.23; posting-account=7Xc2EwkAAABXMcQfERYamr3b-64IkBws
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.208.151.23
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c24231b1-d9fa-4bcb-ab0d-ff8f10299aecn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: dkleine...@gmail.com (DKleinecke)
Injection-Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2022 06:07:06 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 by: DKleinecke - Sat, 16 Apr 2022 06:07 UTC

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 3:21:48 PM UTC-7, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> For those of you who hate Academia.edu:
> 0. Why Copernicus ?
>
> Nicolaus Copernicus (19 February 1473 – 24 May 1543) is well-known for initiating a conceptual change in the modelization of the Solar system and, more generally, of the Universe. The Copernican model displaced the geocentric paradigm of Ptolemy, which had prevailed for centuries and initially placed the Earth at the center of the Universe. Copernican heliocentrism was developed by Nicolaus Copernicus and was first published in 1543. It established that Planet Earth was not the center around which the other celestial bodies were rotating, but that the Sun was the center of the Solar system, around which the planets – including the Earth – were rotating.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_heliocentrism
>
> In other words, Copernicus established that the Earth was neither the center of the Universe nor the center of the Solar system. His model was a breakaway from the previous premises embedded in the geocentric model of Ptolemy.
> In my billets d’humeur, I usually tackle concrete issues about a particular (proto)language, family or theory.
> In my Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus, I will explain what macro-comparative endeavors should be or do and I will describe what historical and comparative linguistics in the 21st century should get rid of.
> 1. What to get rid of (urgently)
>
> 1. To oversimplify, there are two major schools currently working on Nostratic issues: (1) The American school with Joseph Greenberg (1915–2001) and Allan R. Bomhard, (2) the Russian school – aka the Starostin Circus – with [the Russian] Sergei Anatolyević Starostin (1953–2005) and [the American] John D. Bengtson, among many others. I am possibly my own third school, but for the time being, sum vox clamantis in semi-deserto. Another free electron is Václav Blažek. Another interesting figure might be Vitali Viktorović Ševoroškin.
> By an oddly improvized international Division of Labor, the American school tends to work mostly on Indo-European and its putative close relatives. Greenberg’s Eurasiatic and Bomhard’s “Nostratic” are basically extended Indo-European, even though Bomhard does not like my description of his “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European (see below). On the other hand, the Russian school tends to work mostly on the lump of languages called Sino-NaDene-Caucasic. This Division of Labor is an over-simplication of reality, as Greenberg also worked on Amerindian and “Indo-Pacific” languages, while the Russian school produces papers, wordlists and monographs on a large variety of languages (African, etc). It can also be noted that Roger M. Blench produces sketches on lesser-known and endangered languages from Africa or India. Needless to emphasize that all these descriptive works (either by Blench or the Starostin Circus) are highly precious.
>
> 2. On the whole, the American and Russian schools agree on a number of toxic idiocies. The worst of these toxic idiocies is the notion that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan. This toxic idiocy must urgently be dismissed.
> Among other objections, it must be underlined that Sino-Tibetan is not a clear and valid genetic node, in the first place. Needless to say that grafting more groups like NE Caucasic onto a probably invalid ST lump does not help.
> Quite clearly, Basque and NE Caucasic are closely related, as is shown by Bengtson (2017) – be it more or less adequately et avec plus ou moins de bonheur... – but the fact is no less clear that Euskaro-Caucasic is more closely related to IEan than to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan. Let’s put it simple: the Sino-NaDene-Caucasic lump is demented garbage..
> There are certainly several reasons why the relationship of IEan and Euskaro-Caucasic is not correctly recognized.
> The first obstacle is that Caucasology per se is not an easy field to get acquainted with and necessitates to speak or at least be able to read several languages (like Russian, German, etc). Besides, the reference work on Caucasic (NE+NW) – produced by S. Starostin and Nikolayev (Севернокавказский этимологический словарь, A Comparative Dictionary of North Caucasian Languages 1994) – is far from being reliable, especially as regards the reconstructions, which can be described as wildly overcreative, to remain polite. We can nevertheless be grateful that the materials are available and searchable at Starling.ru.
>
> 3. Another toxic idiocy, on which the American and Russian schools agree, is the number of series of stops posited for Nostratic. Even though they bicker about the phonetic nature of the series, they agree that the number should be three. I emphatically assert that this figure is doubtless false. Nostratic had two series: presumably a voiceless series and a voiced series.. The glottalized series is a fiction. For that matter, the model of “Nostratic” proposed by Bomhard is flawed from the start. Many of his proposed sets of comparanda are false, and what is worse, many potential cognates are missing. On the whole, the most acceptable data in Bomhard are those involving voiceless (his th) and voiced (his dh) stops, plus liquids or nasals, and to a lesser extent laryngeals. One reason I describe Bomhard’s “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European is that he erroneously projects the three series of PIE onto an extended perimeter of languages. This procedure is false, as I already criticized in 2010.
> https://diachronica.pagesperso-orange.fr/TMCJ_vol_1.1_Fournet_Review_of_Bomhard_2008.pdf
> “Nostratic” as proposed by Bomhard or the Starostin Circus can be described as a dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm. It contains two major and irremediable flaws: three series, retroprojected from PIE, and the gap between Caucasic and IEan. This dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm is worse than Ptolemy’s geocentric model, because the latter did not propose a dislocated world. Removing these two major flaws is the Copernican revolution I propose and will implement, hopefully with the help of other linguists.
>
> 4. True enough, several groups currently have three series of consonants (or more). But the fact is each group (IEan, Kartvelian, NE Caucasic, etc.) developped additional series – each group on its own – out of a more simple state of language, that had only two series. One of the urgent tasks of macrocomparison is to elucidate and describe how the additional series emerged in each group of Nostratic. Once this is done (presumably I’ll do it in the coming months or years), the relationship of IEan with NE Caucasic will become crystal clear.
>
> 5. Another toxic idiocy that cripples macrocomparison is the myth or dogma that, after some time, say 5,000 or 10,000 years, macrocomparison would allegedly become impossible. This dogma, propagandized by obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin, is just plainly false.. They have no expertise nor experience in macrocomparison. Don’t expect a marxist to explain Latin mass.
>
> 6. Another toxic idiocy is the creationist isolationist bunker, in which the Indo-Europeanist crooks claim PIE has no close nor distant relatives, no ancestors, and Indo-European languages spread in a vacuum, having no substrates. This cryptonazi indo-germanisch myth must be eliminated.
> 2. What to get rid of (slowly)
>
> 7. It can be observed – en passant – that promoters of a connection between Burušaski and Yenisseian, like Bengtson or Blažek, have never published a side-by-side basic wordlist of both groups. As a matter of fact, both groups share about nothing. The inclusion of Yenisseian in Euskaro-Caucasic is highly dubious.
>
> 8. Another problem is Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth, on which Greenberg’s Eurasiatic is based to a large extent. IEan is not a Siberian agglutinative language. For that matter, it has nothing to do with languages of the Ural-Altaic type. The MeTu myth is to a large extent a pareidolic delusion. Needless to say that there is nothing good to expect from the maximally head-shrunken wordlist: me, tu, one, two, three, dog, salt, à la Starostin-Yakhontov.
>
> 9. To some extent, basic wordlists are an issue, especially when used in the most idiotic way, as the head-shrinking Starostin Circus routinely does.. Basic wordlists should be used for comparative purposes, not for unreliable glottochronological calculations. It is just wondrous that the Starostin Circus calculates a 6,000 year distance between Hurrito-Urartian and NE Caucasic languages, when Hurrito-Urartian is not a member of NE Caucasic in the first place.
>
> 10. A reliable laryngeal-oriented reconstruction of Proto-Uralic is in urgent need. Regrettably the most competent Uralicists stick to a retarded vowel-oriented Pokornyan format. Besides, one needs to understand why Samoyedic shares only 250 words with Finno-Ugric. This is unbelievably low. I suspect that a number of metatheses occurred in Finno-Ugric that blur cognacy, with both Samoyedic and Nostratic. For example, (only FU) *walk- is possibly from *lawk- ‘white’, or (only FU) *witti ‘five’ from *tiw-ti ‘the big (thumb)’, or (only FU) *wed- ‘to kill’ from *dhew- ‘to die’. The *CvW- pattern underwent metathesis in FU, certainly, some other patterns also did. I expect the number of shared cognates will increase, once the metatheses in FU have been described.
>
> To summarize, the Copernican prerequisites for Nostratic studies are:
>
> - dismiss the toxic idiocy that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan.
> - dismiss the toxic idiocy that Nostratic would have three series of stops, instead of two (as I propose).
> - elucidate the phonetics paths of each group, out of a simple state of language, that had only two series.
> - dismiss Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth.
> - dismiss the dogma that only shallow-dating comparisons are possible.
> - ignore obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin.
>
>
>  
> 3. A few definitions
>
> PIXA : Proto-Exo-African. According to archeology and paleoanthropology, some 60-50,000 years ago, “modern” man stepped out of Africa and began to spread in Eurasia and beyond. At present, it is not possible to determine if PIXA was a single language, or if there is more than one PIXA, for example PIXA1 would have crossed the Sinai and PIXA2 would have crossed the Red Sea and reached the south of the Arabic Peninsula. The parsimonious hypothesis is that there is only one PIXA.
> It is unclear at this point how many branches PIXA has. Two clear branches are Post-Rhotic and NW Pre-Rhotic.
>
> Nostratic : a broad synonym for “Proto-World”. PIXA is technically more precise, for non-African languages.
> Nostratic has at least two branches: PIXA and PENA (= Proto-Endo-African). It is unclear at this point how many branches of PENA exist. Chamito-Semitic (or Afrasian) is one of them.
>
> PIE : Proto-Indo-European, the ancestor of Post-Anatolian and Anatolian languages.
> IPS : Improved Proto-Sanskrit, the great-daughter of PIE, fraudulently sold as being PIE by the Indo-Europeanist crooks.
>
> Post-Rhotic : at some point, inherited *-s- changed to -r-, word-medially and word-finally in the prehistory of PIE. This group includes PIE, Hurrito-Urartian and Sumerian.
>
> NW Pre-Rhotic : this is a short name than Euskaro-Caucasic for the family including Basque, Caucasic (NE+NW), Burušaski, and probably also Siouan.
>
> Macro-Kartvelian : includes Kartvelian and, probably Etruscan and a good deal of Pre-Greek.
>
>
> 4. What PIXA looked like
>
> The following system (of 24 phonemes) is my reference for PIXA :
>
> 1. Obstruents: p t ǩ k (voiceless stops)
> bh dh ğh gh (voiced stops)
> s / z c / ʒ (sʒibilants)
> 2. Resonants: m n (nasals)
> w y l
> (d)ɮ (t)ɬ (lateral fricatives)
> 3. Laryngeals:
> velars H2- [ḫ] H2+ [ġ]
> pharyngeals H1 [ḥ] H3 [ˁ]
> glottals H4 [ˀ]
>
> Each branch of Nostratic has its own phonetic signature as regards especially the sʒibilants and lateral fricatives.
> As can be seen, PIXA did not have a phoneme *r. For that matter, each branch of Nostratic developped /r/ out of a different inherited phoneme. These phenomena: sʒibilants, lateral fricatives and /r/ are of utmost relevance and importance.
>
>
> (to be continued)


Click here to read the complete article
Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14515&group=sci.lang#14515

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:31a0:b0:69c:52f4:4af0 with SMTP id bi32-20020a05620a31a000b0069c52f44af0mr1293917qkb.485.1650089474006;
Fri, 15 Apr 2022 23:11:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:178d:b0:322:6141:84e7 with SMTP id
bg13-20020a056808178d00b00322614184e7mr339330oib.275.1650089473781; Fri, 15
Apr 2022 23:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 23:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.208.151.23; posting-account=7Xc2EwkAAABXMcQfERYamr3b-64IkBws
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.208.151.23
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: dkleine...@gmail.com (DKleinecke)
Injection-Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2022 06:11:13 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 246
 by: DKleinecke - Sat, 16 Apr 2022 06:11 UTC

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 3:21:48 PM UTC-7, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> For those of you who hate Academia.edu:
> 0. Why Copernicus ?
>
> Nicolaus Copernicus (19 February 1473 – 24 May 1543) is well-known for initiating a conceptual change in the modelization of the Solar system and, more generally, of the Universe. The Copernican model displaced the geocentric paradigm of Ptolemy, which had prevailed for centuries and initially placed the Earth at the center of the Universe. Copernican heliocentrism was developed by Nicolaus Copernicus and was first published in 1543. It established that Planet Earth was not the center around which the other celestial bodies were rotating, but that the Sun was the center of the Solar system, around which the planets – including the Earth – were rotating.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_heliocentrism
>
> In other words, Copernicus established that the Earth was neither the center of the Universe nor the center of the Solar system. His model was a breakaway from the previous premises embedded in the geocentric model of Ptolemy.
> In my billets d’humeur, I usually tackle concrete issues about a particular (proto)language, family or theory.
> In my Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus, I will explain what macro-comparative endeavors should be or do and I will describe what historical and comparative linguistics in the 21st century should get rid of.
> 1. What to get rid of (urgently)
>
> 1. To oversimplify, there are two major schools currently working on Nostratic issues: (1) The American school with Joseph Greenberg (1915–2001) and Allan R. Bomhard, (2) the Russian school – aka the Starostin Circus – with [the Russian] Sergei Anatolyević Starostin (1953–2005) and [the American] John D. Bengtson, among many others. I am possibly my own third school, but for the time being, sum vox clamantis in semi-deserto. Another free electron is Václav Blažek. Another interesting figure might be Vitali Viktorović Ševoroškin.
> By an oddly improvized international Division of Labor, the American school tends to work mostly on Indo-European and its putative close relatives. Greenberg’s Eurasiatic and Bomhard’s “Nostratic” are basically extended Indo-European, even though Bomhard does not like my description of his “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European (see below). On the other hand, the Russian school tends to work mostly on the lump of languages called Sino-NaDene-Caucasic. This Division of Labor is an over-simplication of reality, as Greenberg also worked on Amerindian and “Indo-Pacific” languages, while the Russian school produces papers, wordlists and monographs on a large variety of languages (African, etc). It can also be noted that Roger M. Blench produces sketches on lesser-known and endangered languages from Africa or India. Needless to emphasize that all these descriptive works (either by Blench or the Starostin Circus) are highly precious.
>
> 2. On the whole, the American and Russian schools agree on a number of toxic idiocies. The worst of these toxic idiocies is the notion that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan. This toxic idiocy must urgently be dismissed.
> Among other objections, it must be underlined that Sino-Tibetan is not a clear and valid genetic node, in the first place. Needless to say that grafting more groups like NE Caucasic onto a probably invalid ST lump does not help.
> Quite clearly, Basque and NE Caucasic are closely related, as is shown by Bengtson (2017) – be it more or less adequately et avec plus ou moins de bonheur... – but the fact is no less clear that Euskaro-Caucasic is more closely related to IEan than to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan. Let’s put it simple: the Sino-NaDene-Caucasic lump is demented garbage..
> There are certainly several reasons why the relationship of IEan and Euskaro-Caucasic is not correctly recognized.
> The first obstacle is that Caucasology per se is not an easy field to get acquainted with and necessitates to speak or at least be able to read several languages (like Russian, German, etc). Besides, the reference work on Caucasic (NE+NW) – produced by S. Starostin and Nikolayev (Севернокавказский этимологический словарь, A Comparative Dictionary of North Caucasian Languages 1994) – is far from being reliable, especially as regards the reconstructions, which can be described as wildly overcreative, to remain polite. We can nevertheless be grateful that the materials are available and searchable at Starling.ru.
>
> 3. Another toxic idiocy, on which the American and Russian schools agree, is the number of series of stops posited for Nostratic. Even though they bicker about the phonetic nature of the series, they agree that the number should be three. I emphatically assert that this figure is doubtless false. Nostratic had two series: presumably a voiceless series and a voiced series.. The glottalized series is a fiction. For that matter, the model of “Nostratic” proposed by Bomhard is flawed from the start. Many of his proposed sets of comparanda are false, and what is worse, many potential cognates are missing. On the whole, the most acceptable data in Bomhard are those involving voiceless (his th) and voiced (his dh) stops, plus liquids or nasals, and to a lesser extent laryngeals. One reason I describe Bomhard’s “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European is that he erroneously projects the three series of PIE onto an extended perimeter of languages. This procedure is false, as I already criticized in 2010.
> https://diachronica.pagesperso-orange.fr/TMCJ_vol_1.1_Fournet_Review_of_Bomhard_2008.pdf
> “Nostratic” as proposed by Bomhard or the Starostin Circus can be described as a dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm. It contains two major and irremediable flaws: three series, retroprojected from PIE, and the gap between Caucasic and IEan. This dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm is worse than Ptolemy’s geocentric model, because the latter did not propose a dislocated world. Removing these two major flaws is the Copernican revolution I propose and will implement, hopefully with the help of other linguists.
>
> 4. True enough, several groups currently have three series of consonants (or more). But the fact is each group (IEan, Kartvelian, NE Caucasic, etc.) developped additional series – each group on its own – out of a more simple state of language, that had only two series. One of the urgent tasks of macrocomparison is to elucidate and describe how the additional series emerged in each group of Nostratic. Once this is done (presumably I’ll do it in the coming months or years), the relationship of IEan with NE Caucasic will become crystal clear.
>
> 5. Another toxic idiocy that cripples macrocomparison is the myth or dogma that, after some time, say 5,000 or 10,000 years, macrocomparison would allegedly become impossible. This dogma, propagandized by obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin, is just plainly false.. They have no expertise nor experience in macrocomparison. Don’t expect a marxist to explain Latin mass.
>
> 6. Another toxic idiocy is the creationist isolationist bunker, in which the Indo-Europeanist crooks claim PIE has no close nor distant relatives, no ancestors, and Indo-European languages spread in a vacuum, having no substrates. This cryptonazi indo-germanisch myth must be eliminated.
> 2. What to get rid of (slowly)
>
> 7. It can be observed – en passant – that promoters of a connection between Burušaski and Yenisseian, like Bengtson or Blažek, have never published a side-by-side basic wordlist of both groups. As a matter of fact, both groups share about nothing. The inclusion of Yenisseian in Euskaro-Caucasic is highly dubious.
>
> 8. Another problem is Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth, on which Greenberg’s Eurasiatic is based to a large extent. IEan is not a Siberian agglutinative language. For that matter, it has nothing to do with languages of the Ural-Altaic type. The MeTu myth is to a large extent a pareidolic delusion. Needless to say that there is nothing good to expect from the maximally head-shrunken wordlist: me, tu, one, two, three, dog, salt, à la Starostin-Yakhontov.
>
> 9. To some extent, basic wordlists are an issue, especially when used in the most idiotic way, as the head-shrinking Starostin Circus routinely does.. Basic wordlists should be used for comparative purposes, not for unreliable glottochronological calculations. It is just wondrous that the Starostin Circus calculates a 6,000 year distance between Hurrito-Urartian and NE Caucasic languages, when Hurrito-Urartian is not a member of NE Caucasic in the first place.
>
> 10. A reliable laryngeal-oriented reconstruction of Proto-Uralic is in urgent need. Regrettably the most competent Uralicists stick to a retarded vowel-oriented Pokornyan format. Besides, one needs to understand why Samoyedic shares only 250 words with Finno-Ugric. This is unbelievably low. I suspect that a number of metatheses occurred in Finno-Ugric that blur cognacy, with both Samoyedic and Nostratic. For example, (only FU) *walk- is possibly from *lawk- ‘white’, or (only FU) *witti ‘five’ from *tiw-ti ‘the big (thumb)’, or (only FU) *wed- ‘to kill’ from *dhew- ‘to die’. The *CvW- pattern underwent metathesis in FU, certainly, some other patterns also did. I expect the number of shared cognates will increase, once the metatheses in FU have been described.
>
> To summarize, the Copernican prerequisites for Nostratic studies are:
>
> - dismiss the toxic idiocy that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan.
> - dismiss the toxic idiocy that Nostratic would have three series of stops, instead of two (as I propose).
> - elucidate the phonetics paths of each group, out of a simple state of language, that had only two series.
> - dismiss Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth.
> - dismiss the dogma that only shallow-dating comparisons are possible.
> - ignore obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin.
>
>
>  
> 3. A few definitions
>
> PIXA : Proto-Exo-African. According to archeology and paleoanthropology, some 60-50,000 years ago, “modern” man stepped out of Africa and began to spread in Eurasia and beyond. At present, it is not possible to determine if PIXA was a single language, or if there is more than one PIXA, for example PIXA1 would have crossed the Sinai and PIXA2 would have crossed the Red Sea and reached the south of the Arabic Peninsula. The parsimonious hypothesis is that there is only one PIXA.
> It is unclear at this point how many branches PIXA has. Two clear branches are Post-Rhotic and NW Pre-Rhotic.
>
> Nostratic : a broad synonym for “Proto-World”. PIXA is technically more precise, for non-African languages.
> Nostratic has at least two branches: PIXA and PENA (= Proto-Endo-African). It is unclear at this point how many branches of PENA exist. Chamito-Semitic (or Afrasian) is one of them.
>
> PIE : Proto-Indo-European, the ancestor of Post-Anatolian and Anatolian languages.
> IPS : Improved Proto-Sanskrit, the great-daughter of PIE, fraudulently sold as being PIE by the Indo-Europeanist crooks.
>
> Post-Rhotic : at some point, inherited *-s- changed to -r-, word-medially and word-finally in the prehistory of PIE. This group includes PIE, Hurrito-Urartian and Sumerian.
>
> NW Pre-Rhotic : this is a short name than Euskaro-Caucasic for the family including Basque, Caucasic (NE+NW), Burušaski, and probably also Siouan.
>
> Macro-Kartvelian : includes Kartvelian and, probably Etruscan and a good deal of Pre-Greek.
>
>
> 4. What PIXA looked like
>
> The following system (of 24 phonemes) is my reference for PIXA :
>
> 1. Obstruents: p t ǩ k (voiceless stops)
> bh dh ğh gh (voiced stops)
> s / z c / ʒ (sʒibilants)
> 2. Resonants: m n (nasals)
> w y l
> (d)ɮ (t)ɬ (lateral fricatives)
> 3. Laryngeals:
> velars H2- [ḫ] H2+ [ġ]
> pharyngeals H1 [ḥ] H3 [ˁ]
> glottals H4 [ˀ]
>
> Each branch of Nostratic has its own phonetic signature as regards especially the sʒibilants and lateral fricatives.
> As can be seen, PIXA did not have a phoneme *r. For that matter, each branch of Nostratic developped /r/ out of a different inherited phoneme. These phenomena: sʒibilants, lateral fricatives and /r/ are of utmost relevance and importance.
>
>
> (to be continued)


Click here to read the complete article
Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14522&group=sci.lang#14522

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:ae9:ef55:0:b0:69e:7116:8644 with SMTP id d82-20020ae9ef55000000b0069e71168644mr2790078qkg.293.1650170699285;
Sat, 16 Apr 2022 21:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:1a1c:b0:2fa:6c17:5c07 with SMTP id
bk28-20020a0568081a1c00b002fa6c175c07mr4727884oib.80.1650170699035; Sat, 16
Apr 2022 21:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2022 21:44:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:440:df8:44b2:19ff;
posting-account=aSvcbwoAAADuTTuNpgwK5PoqH8BpbsBl
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:440:df8:44b2:19ff
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com> <9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: fournet....@wanadoo.fr (Arnaud Fournet)
Injection-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 04:44:59 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 291
 by: Arnaud Fournet - Sun, 17 Apr 2022 04:44 UTC

Le samedi 16 avril 2022 à 08:11:15 UTC+2, DKleinecke a écrit :
> On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 3:21:48 PM UTC-7, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> > For those of you who hate Academia.edu:
> > 0. Why Copernicus ?
> >
> > Nicolaus Copernicus (19 February 1473 – 24 May 1543) is well-known for initiating a conceptual change in the modelization of the Solar system and, more generally, of the Universe. The Copernican model displaced the geocentric paradigm of Ptolemy, which had prevailed for centuries and initially placed the Earth at the center of the Universe. Copernican heliocentrism was developed by Nicolaus Copernicus and was first published in 1543. It established that Planet Earth was not the center around which the other celestial bodies were rotating, but that the Sun was the center of the Solar system, around which the planets – including the Earth – were rotating.
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_heliocentrism
> >
> > In other words, Copernicus established that the Earth was neither the center of the Universe nor the center of the Solar system. His model was a breakaway from the previous premises embedded in the geocentric model of Ptolemy.
> > In my billets d’humeur, I usually tackle concrete issues about a particular (proto)language, family or theory.
> > In my Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus, I will explain what macro-comparative endeavors should be or do and I will describe what historical and comparative linguistics in the 21st century should get rid of.
> > 1. What to get rid of (urgently)
> >
> > 1. To oversimplify, there are two major schools currently working on Nostratic issues: (1) The American school with Joseph Greenberg (1915–2001) and Allan R. Bomhard, (2) the Russian school – aka the Starostin Circus – with [the Russian] Sergei Anatolyević Starostin (1953–2005) and [the American] John D. Bengtson, among many others. I am possibly my own third school, but for the time being, sum vox clamantis in semi-deserto. Another free electron is Václav Blažek. Another interesting figure might be Vitali Viktorović Ševoroškin.
> > By an oddly improvized international Division of Labor, the American school tends to work mostly on Indo-European and its putative close relatives.. Greenberg’s Eurasiatic and Bomhard’s “Nostratic” are basically extended Indo-European, even though Bomhard does not like my description of his “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European (see below). On the other hand, the Russian school tends to work mostly on the lump of languages called Sino-NaDene-Caucasic. This Division of Labor is an over-simplication of reality, as Greenberg also worked on Amerindian and “Indo-Pacific” languages, while the Russian school produces papers, wordlists and monographs on a large variety of languages (African, etc). It can also be noted that Roger M. Blench produces sketches on lesser-known and endangered languages from Africa or India. Needless to emphasize that all these descriptive works (either by Blench or the Starostin Circus) are highly precious.
> >
> > 2. On the whole, the American and Russian schools agree on a number of toxic idiocies. The worst of these toxic idiocies is the notion that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan.. This toxic idiocy must urgently be dismissed.
> > Among other objections, it must be underlined that Sino-Tibetan is not a clear and valid genetic node, in the first place. Needless to say that grafting more groups like NE Caucasic onto a probably invalid ST lump does not help.
> > Quite clearly, Basque and NE Caucasic are closely related, as is shown by Bengtson (2017) – be it more or less adequately et avec plus ou moins de bonheur... – but the fact is no less clear that Euskaro-Caucasic is more closely related to IEan than to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan. Let’s put it simple: the Sino-NaDene-Caucasic lump is demented garbage..
> > There are certainly several reasons why the relationship of IEan and Euskaro-Caucasic is not correctly recognized.
> > The first obstacle is that Caucasology per se is not an easy field to get acquainted with and necessitates to speak or at least be able to read several languages (like Russian, German, etc). Besides, the reference work on Caucasic (NE+NW) – produced by S. Starostin and Nikolayev (Севернокавказский этимологический словарь, A Comparative Dictionary of North Caucasian Languages 1994) – is far from being reliable, especially as regards the reconstructions, which can be described as wildly overcreative, to remain polite. We can nevertheless be grateful that the materials are available and searchable at Starling.ru.
> >
> > 3. Another toxic idiocy, on which the American and Russian schools agree, is the number of series of stops posited for Nostratic. Even though they bicker about the phonetic nature of the series, they agree that the number should be three. I emphatically assert that this figure is doubtless false.. Nostratic had two series: presumably a voiceless series and a voiced series. The glottalized series is a fiction. For that matter, the model of “Nostratic” proposed by Bomhard is flawed from the start. Many of his proposed sets of comparanda are false, and what is worse, many potential cognates are missing. On the whole, the most acceptable data in Bomhard are those involving voiceless (his th) and voiced (his dh) stops, plus liquids or nasals, and to a lesser extent laryngeals. One reason I describe Bomhard’s “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European is that he erroneously projects the three series of PIE onto an extended perimeter of languages. This procedure is false, as I already criticized in 2010.
> > https://diachronica.pagesperso-orange.fr/TMCJ_vol_1.1_Fournet_Review_of_Bomhard_2008.pdf
> > “Nostratic” as proposed by Bomhard or the Starostin Circus can be described as a dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm. It contains two major and irremediable flaws: three series, retroprojected from PIE, and the gap between Caucasic and IEan. This dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm is worse than Ptolemy’s geocentric model, because the latter did not propose a dislocated world. Removing these two major flaws is the Copernican revolution I propose and will implement, hopefully with the help of other linguists.
> >
> > 4. True enough, several groups currently have three series of consonants (or more). But the fact is each group (IEan, Kartvelian, NE Caucasic, etc..) developped additional series – each group on its own – out of a more simple state of language, that had only two series. One of the urgent tasks of macrocomparison is to elucidate and describe how the additional series emerged in each group of Nostratic. Once this is done (presumably I’ll do it in the coming months or years), the relationship of IEan with NE Caucasic will become crystal clear.
> >
> > 5. Another toxic idiocy that cripples macrocomparison is the myth or dogma that, after some time, say 5,000 or 10,000 years, macrocomparison would allegedly become impossible. This dogma, propagandized by obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin, is just plainly false. They have no expertise nor experience in macrocomparison. Don’t expect a marxist to explain Latin mass.
> >
> > 6. Another toxic idiocy is the creationist isolationist bunker, in which the Indo-Europeanist crooks claim PIE has no close nor distant relatives, no ancestors, and Indo-European languages spread in a vacuum, having no substrates. This cryptonazi indo-germanisch myth must be eliminated.
> > 2. What to get rid of (slowly)
> >
> > 7. It can be observed – en passant – that promoters of a connection between Burušaski and Yenisseian, like Bengtson or Blažek, have never published a side-by-side basic wordlist of both groups. As a matter of fact, both groups share about nothing. The inclusion of Yenisseian in Euskaro-Caucasic is highly dubious.
> >
> > 8. Another problem is Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth, on which Greenberg’s Eurasiatic is based to a large extent. IEan is not a Siberian agglutinative language. For that matter, it has nothing to do with languages of the Ural-Altaic type. The MeTu myth is to a large extent a pareidolic delusion. Needless to say that there is nothing good to expect from the maximally head-shrunken wordlist: me, tu, one, two, three, dog, salt, à la Starostin-Yakhontov.
> >
> > 9. To some extent, basic wordlists are an issue, especially when used in the most idiotic way, as the head-shrinking Starostin Circus routinely does. Basic wordlists should be used for comparative purposes, not for unreliable glottochronological calculations. It is just wondrous that the Starostin Circus calculates a 6,000 year distance between Hurrito-Urartian and NE Caucasic languages, when Hurrito-Urartian is not a member of NE Caucasic in the first place.
> >
> > 10. A reliable laryngeal-oriented reconstruction of Proto-Uralic is in urgent need. Regrettably the most competent Uralicists stick to a retarded vowel-oriented Pokornyan format. Besides, one needs to understand why Samoyedic shares only 250 words with Finno-Ugric. This is unbelievably low. I suspect that a number of metatheses occurred in Finno-Ugric that blur cognacy, with both Samoyedic and Nostratic. For example, (only FU) *walk- is possibly from *lawk- ‘white’, or (only FU) *witti ‘five’ from *tiw-ti ‘the big (thumb)’, or (only FU) *wed- ‘to kill’ from *dhew- ‘to die’. The *CvW- pattern underwent metathesis in FU, certainly, some other patterns also did. I expect the number of shared cognates will increase, once the metatheses in FU have been described.
> >
> > To summarize, the Copernican prerequisites for Nostratic studies are:
> >
> > - dismiss the toxic idiocy that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan.
> > - dismiss the toxic idiocy that Nostratic would have three series of stops, instead of two (as I propose).
> > - elucidate the phonetics paths of each group, out of a simple state of language, that had only two series.
> > - dismiss Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth.
> > - dismiss the dogma that only shallow-dating comparisons are possible.
> > - ignore obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin.
> >
> >
> >  
> > 3. A few definitions
> >
> > PIXA : Proto-Exo-African. According to archeology and paleoanthropology, some 60-50,000 years ago, “modern” man stepped out of Africa and began to spread in Eurasia and beyond. At present, it is not possible to determine if PIXA was a single language, or if there is more than one PIXA, for example PIXA1 would have crossed the Sinai and PIXA2 would have crossed the Red Sea and reached the south of the Arabic Peninsula. The parsimonious hypothesis is that there is only one PIXA.
> > It is unclear at this point how many branches PIXA has. Two clear branches are Post-Rhotic and NW Pre-Rhotic.
> >
> > Nostratic : a broad synonym for “Proto-World”. PIXA is technically more precise, for non-African languages.
> > Nostratic has at least two branches: PIXA and PENA (= Proto-Endo-African). It is unclear at this point how many branches of PENA exist. Chamito-Semitic (or Afrasian) is one of them.
> >
> > PIE : Proto-Indo-European, the ancestor of Post-Anatolian and Anatolian languages.
> > IPS : Improved Proto-Sanskrit, the great-daughter of PIE, fraudulently sold as being PIE by the Indo-Europeanist crooks.
> >
> > Post-Rhotic : at some point, inherited *-s- changed to -r-, word-medially and word-finally in the prehistory of PIE. This group includes PIE, Hurrito-Urartian and Sumerian.
> >
> > NW Pre-Rhotic : this is a short name than Euskaro-Caucasic for the family including Basque, Caucasic (NE+NW), Burušaski, and probably also Siouan.
> >
> > Macro-Kartvelian : includes Kartvelian and, probably Etruscan and a good deal of Pre-Greek.
> >
> >
> > 4. What PIXA looked like
> >
> > The following system (of 24 phonemes) is my reference for PIXA :
> >
> > 1. Obstruents: p t ǩ k (voiceless stops)
> > bh dh ğh gh (voiced stops)
> > s / z c / ʒ (sʒibilants)
> > 2. Resonants: m n (nasals)
> > w y l
> > (d)ɮ (t)ɬ (lateral fricatives)
> > 3. Laryngeals:
> > velars H2- [ḫ] H2+ [ġ]
> > pharyngeals H1 [ḥ] H3 [ˁ]
> > glottals H4 [ˀ]
> >
> > Each branch of Nostratic has its own phonetic signature as regards especially the sʒibilants and lateral fricatives.
> > As can be seen, PIXA did not have a phoneme *r. For that matter, each branch of Nostratic developped /r/ out of a different inherited phoneme. These phenomena: sʒibilants, lateral fricatives and /r/ are of utmost relevance and importance.
> >
> >
> > (to be continued)
> Thank You for your clear statement.
>
> I don't know enough to have an opinion other than that this Nostratic research seems to be based on very flimsy foundations.
>
> But I could be wrong. Keep up the good work.


Click here to read the complete article
Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<jc2em6F6k4sU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14523&group=sci.lang#14523

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!lilly.ping.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: acorn...@imm.cnrs.fr (Athel Cornish-Bowden)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 14:15:01 +0200
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <jc2em6F6k4sU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net X1JZRKUmmgMiZsom9uVdJwVrxdwLwwNHDjDIcQzx7ajIEdk1j+
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+V5HbBJtkK8xly1uvtnhJ3z8bWQ=
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
 by: Athel Cornish-Bowden - Sun, 17 Apr 2022 12:15 UTC

On 2022-04-17 04:44:58 +0000, Arnaud Fournet said:

> Bomhard is now very old, and I don't think he's going to accept my
> Copernican revolution. He accuses me of "grandstanding", so he'll just
> have to see his approach going to the grave.

He is the same age as I am (78-79). I don't regard myself as very old!

--
Athel -- French and British, living mainly in England until 1987.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14524&group=sci.lang#14524

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:8e0b:0:b0:435:1779:7b22 with SMTP id v11-20020a0c8e0b000000b0043517797b22mr5019803qvb.63.1650202777191;
Sun, 17 Apr 2022 06:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:1152:b0:2da:c7f:66c2 with SMTP id
u18-20020a056808115200b002da0c7f66c2mr5221697oiu.253.1650202776984; Sun, 17
Apr 2022 06:39:36 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 06:39:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=100.8.211.134; posting-account=tXYReAoAAABbl0njRzivyU02EBLaX9OF
NNTP-Posting-Host: 100.8.211.134
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: gramma...@verizon.net (Peter T. Daniels)
Injection-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 13:39:37 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 24
 by: Peter T. Daniels - Sun, 17 Apr 2022 13:39 UTC

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:45:00 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:

> I don't expect much from Indo-Europeanists, who I consider are crooks
> and liars for the most part,

"How to win friends and influence people"

> quite conceited on top of the rest. I'll do myself the job of reconstructing
> the common ancestor of Siouan, Basque, Caucasic, PIE, Hurrito-Urartian,

Of all the dozens of Western Hemisphere language families, why only Siouan?

> Kartvelian. I expect considerable resistance to my theory among Indo-
> Europeanists. But anyway I don't care. I don't need them.

Do you recognize that the reason IE and Semitic reconstruction worked
so well is that they had written records thousands of years old for many
of the branches?

Do you understand that you need to reconstruct the putative historic
moves that got just the languages you focus on into the positions
where they are found in real life? And hence the subgroupings?

***
Please set a 72-character line length.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<5a4b1e85-dc22-4481-8692-994b4c57f709n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14525&group=sci.lang#14525

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:caa:b0:441:2e8f:f398 with SMTP id s10-20020a0562140caa00b004412e8ff398mr5328283qvs.61.1650208944235;
Sun, 17 Apr 2022 08:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4d15:0:b0:605:4c65:c723 with SMTP id
n21-20020a9d4d15000000b006054c65c723mr368800otf.101.1650208943949; Sun, 17
Apr 2022 08:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 08:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:440:df8:44b2:19ff;
posting-account=aSvcbwoAAADuTTuNpgwK5PoqH8BpbsBl
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:440:df8:44b2:19ff
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <5a4b1e85-dc22-4481-8692-994b4c57f709n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: fournet....@wanadoo.fr (Arnaud Fournet)
Injection-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 15:22:24 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 32
 by: Arnaud Fournet - Sun, 17 Apr 2022 15:22 UTC

Le dimanche 17 avril 2022 à 15:39:38 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:45:00 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
>
> > I don't expect much from Indo-Europeanists, who I consider are crooks
> > and liars for the most part,
> "How to win friends and influence people"
> > quite conceited on top of the rest. I'll do myself the job of reconstructing
> > the common ancestor of Siouan, Basque, Caucasic, PIE, Hurrito-Urartian,
> Of all the dozens of Western Hemisphere language families, why only Siouan?
Siouan is demonstrably a close relative of Basque.
> > Kartvelian. I expect considerable resistance to my theory among Indo-
> > Europeanists. But anyway I don't care. I don't need them.
> Do you recognize that the reason IE and Semitic reconstruction worked
> so well is that they had written records thousands of years old for many
> of the branches?
This is a non-issue.

>
> Do you understand that you need to reconstruct the putative historic
> moves that got just the languages you focus on into the positions
> where they are found in real life? And hence the subgroupings?
What does this mean?

>
> ***
> Please set a 72-character line length.
No idea what the problem is.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<4a114861-93bc-402b-b48c-dad4935f97b7n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14526&group=sci.lang#14526

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:d69:b0:446:4e36:383e with SMTP id 9-20020a0562140d6900b004464e36383emr3422348qvs.71.1650211507952;
Sun, 17 Apr 2022 09:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:f28e:b0:de:f169:cd9 with SMTP id
u14-20020a056870f28e00b000def1690cd9mr4615944oap.262.1650211507685; Sun, 17
Apr 2022 09:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 09:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5a4b1e85-dc22-4481-8692-994b4c57f709n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=100.8.211.134; posting-account=tXYReAoAAABbl0njRzivyU02EBLaX9OF
NNTP-Posting-Host: 100.8.211.134
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <5a4b1e85-dc22-4481-8692-994b4c57f709n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <4a114861-93bc-402b-b48c-dad4935f97b7n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: gramma...@verizon.net (Peter T. Daniels)
Injection-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 16:05:07 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 56
 by: Peter T. Daniels - Sun, 17 Apr 2022 16:05 UTC

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:22:25 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> Le dimanche 17 avril 2022 à 15:39:38 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:45:00 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:

> > > I don't expect much from Indo-Europeanists, who I consider are crooks
> > > and liars for the most part,
> > "How to win friends and influence people"
> > > quite conceited on top of the rest. I'll do myself the job of reconstructing
> > > the common ancestor of Siouan, Basque, Caucasic, PIE, Hurrito-Urartian,
> > Of all the dozens of Western Hemisphere language families, why only Siouan?
>
> Siouan is demonstrably a close relative of Basque.

It may have close relatives elsewhere in North America.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siouan_languages#External_relations

Note the mention o0f "Sprachbund" there. Variationist, typological,
and areal linguistics are casting serious doubt on the methodology
of comparative linguistics -- which was founded on languages attested
thousands of years before the present.

> > > Kartvelian. I expect considerable resistance to my theory among Indo-
> > > Europeanists. But anyway I don't care. I don't need them.
> > Do you recognize that the reason IE and Semitic reconstruction worked
> > so well is that they had written records thousands of years old for many
> > of the branches?
>
> This is a non-issue.

Not for historical linguistics methodology.

> > Do you understand that you need to reconstruct the putative historic
> > moves that got just the languages you focus on into the positions
> > where they are found in real life? And hence the subgroupings?
>
> What does this mean?

How does one group of speakers produce descendants only in the
Basque country of Spain/France and in the middle of North America?

> > ***
> > Please set a 72-character line length.
>
> No idea what the problem is.

Your endless paragraphs are hundreds of characters long and
do not quote readably.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<4b844d15-6c9a-4544-b2f6-994dfb437ffan@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14527&group=sci.lang#14527

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2912:b0:680:9c3d:b806 with SMTP id m18-20020a05620a291200b006809c3db806mr4589382qkp.462.1650213931421;
Sun, 17 Apr 2022 09:45:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:114e:b0:2ec:eb48:23d3 with SMTP id
u14-20020a056808114e00b002eceb4823d3mr5424495oiu.262.1650213931083; Sun, 17
Apr 2022 09:45:31 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 09:45:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4a114861-93bc-402b-b48c-dad4935f97b7n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:440:df8:44b2:19ff;
posting-account=aSvcbwoAAADuTTuNpgwK5PoqH8BpbsBl
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:440:df8:44b2:19ff
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <5a4b1e85-dc22-4481-8692-994b4c57f709n@googlegroups.com>
<4a114861-93bc-402b-b48c-dad4935f97b7n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <4b844d15-6c9a-4544-b2f6-994dfb437ffan@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: fournet....@wanadoo.fr (Arnaud Fournet)
Injection-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 16:45:31 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 43
 by: Arnaud Fournet - Sun, 17 Apr 2022 16:45 UTC

Le dimanche 17 avril 2022 à 18:05:09 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:22:25 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> > Le dimanche 17 avril 2022 à 15:39:38 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:45:00 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
>
> > > > I don't expect much from Indo-Europeanists, who I consider are crooks
> > > > and liars for the most part,
> > > "How to win friends and influence people"
> > > > quite conceited on top of the rest. I'll do myself the job of reconstructing
> > > > the common ancestor of Siouan, Basque, Caucasic, PIE, Hurrito-Urartian,
> > > Of all the dozens of Western Hemisphere language families, why only Siouan?
> >
> > Siouan is demonstrably a close relative of Basque.
> It may have close relatives elsewhere in North America.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siouan_languages#External_relations
yes, Yuchi is quite certainly related to Siouan.
>
> Note the mention o0f "Sprachbund" there. Variationist, typological,
> and areal linguistics are casting serious doubt on the methodology
> of comparative linguistics -- which was founded on languages attested
> thousands of years before the present.
> > > > Kartvelian. I expect considerable resistance to my theory among Indo-
> > > > Europeanists. But anyway I don't care. I don't need them.
> > > Do you recognize that the reason IE and Semitic reconstruction worked
> > > so well is that they had written records thousands of years old for many
> > > of the branches?
> > Have you ever heard that IEan speakers flooded Europe?
> > > ***
> > > Please set a 72-character line length.
> >
> > No idea what the problem is.
> Your endless paragraphs are hundreds of characters long and
> do not quote readably.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<aa3c7ea2-e91e-4c30-a959-1ce34455ffe8n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14528&group=sci.lang#14528

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:65d1:0:b0:2f1:e3fe:2b5d with SMTP id t17-20020ac865d1000000b002f1e3fe2b5dmr5565713qto.382.1650234210496;
Sun, 17 Apr 2022 15:23:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4d15:0:b0:605:4c65:c723 with SMTP id
n21-20020a9d4d15000000b006054c65c723mr802536otf.101.1650234210237; Sun, 17
Apr 2022 15:23:30 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 15:23:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4b844d15-6c9a-4544-b2f6-994dfb437ffan@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.208.151.23; posting-account=7Xc2EwkAAABXMcQfERYamr3b-64IkBws
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.208.151.23
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <5a4b1e85-dc22-4481-8692-994b4c57f709n@googlegroups.com>
<4a114861-93bc-402b-b48c-dad4935f97b7n@googlegroups.com> <4b844d15-6c9a-4544-b2f6-994dfb437ffan@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <aa3c7ea2-e91e-4c30-a959-1ce34455ffe8n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: dkleine...@gmail.com (DKleinecke)
Injection-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 22:23:30 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 46
 by: DKleinecke - Sun, 17 Apr 2022 22:23 UTC

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 9:45:32 AM UTC-7, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> Le dimanche 17 avril 2022 à 18:05:09 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:22:25 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> > > Le dimanche 17 avril 2022 à 15:39:38 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > > > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:45:00 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> >
> > > > > I don't expect much from Indo-Europeanists, who I consider are crooks
> > > > > and liars for the most part,
> > > > "How to win friends and influence people"
> > > > > quite conceited on top of the rest. I'll do myself the job of reconstructing
> > > > > the common ancestor of Siouan, Basque, Caucasic, PIE, Hurrito-Urartian,
> > > > Of all the dozens of Western Hemisphere language families, why only Siouan?
> > >
> > > Siouan is demonstrably a close relative of Basque.
> > It may have close relatives elsewhere in North America.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siouan_languages#External_relations
> yes, Yuchi is quite certainly related to Siouan.
> >
> > Note the mention o0f "Sprachbund" there. Variationist, typological,
> > and areal linguistics are casting serious doubt on the methodology
> > of comparative linguistics -- which was founded on languages attested
> > thousands of years before the present.
> > > > > Kartvelian. I expect considerable resistance to my theory among Indo-
> > > > > Europeanists. But anyway I don't care. I don't need them.
> > > > Do you recognize that the reason IE and Semitic reconstruction worked
> > > > so well is that they had written records thousands of years old for many
> > > > of the branches?
> > > Have you ever heard that IEan speakers flooded Europe?
> > > > ***
> > > > Please set a 72-character line length.
> > >
> > > No idea what the problem is.
> > Your endless paragraphs are hundreds of characters long and
> > do not quote readably.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<e1f8469a-c2ce-48a2-96d1-1064e535966fn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14529&group=sci.lang#14529

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5947:0:b0:446:4c6a:32d0 with SMTP id eo7-20020ad45947000000b004464c6a32d0mr4467789qvb.131.1650234555662;
Sun, 17 Apr 2022 15:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:170a:b0:2fa:7168:392b with SMTP id
bc10-20020a056808170a00b002fa7168392bmr5854321oib.84.1650234555375; Sun, 17
Apr 2022 15:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 15:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.208.151.23; posting-account=7Xc2EwkAAABXMcQfERYamr3b-64IkBws
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.208.151.23
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <e1f8469a-c2ce-48a2-96d1-1064e535966fn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: dkleine...@gmail.com (DKleinecke)
Injection-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 22:29:15 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 297
 by: DKleinecke - Sun, 17 Apr 2022 22:29 UTC

On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 9:45:00 PM UTC-7, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> Le samedi 16 avril 2022 à 08:11:15 UTC+2, DKleinecke a écrit :
> > On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 3:21:48 PM UTC-7, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> > > For those of you who hate Academia.edu:
> > > 0. Why Copernicus ?
> > >
> > > Nicolaus Copernicus (19 February 1473 – 24 May 1543) is well-known for initiating a conceptual change in the modelization of the Solar system and, more generally, of the Universe. The Copernican model displaced the geocentric paradigm of Ptolemy, which had prevailed for centuries and initially placed the Earth at the center of the Universe. Copernican heliocentrism was developed by Nicolaus Copernicus and was first published in 1543.. It established that Planet Earth was not the center around which the other celestial bodies were rotating, but that the Sun was the center of the Solar system, around which the planets – including the Earth – were rotating.
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_heliocentrism
> > >
> > > In other words, Copernicus established that the Earth was neither the center of the Universe nor the center of the Solar system. His model was a breakaway from the previous premises embedded in the geocentric model of Ptolemy.
> > > In my billets d’humeur, I usually tackle concrete issues about a particular (proto)language, family or theory.
> > > In my Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus, I will explain what macro-comparative endeavors should be or do and I will describe what historical and comparative linguistics in the 21st century should get rid of.
> > > 1. What to get rid of (urgently)
> > >
> > > 1. To oversimplify, there are two major schools currently working on Nostratic issues: (1) The American school with Joseph Greenberg (1915–2001) and Allan R. Bomhard, (2) the Russian school – aka the Starostin Circus – with [the Russian] Sergei Anatolyević Starostin (1953–2005) and [the American] John D. Bengtson, among many others. I am possibly my own third school, but for the time being, sum vox clamantis in semi-deserto. Another free electron is Václav Blažek. Another interesting figure might be Vitali Viktorović Ševoroškin.
> > > By an oddly improvized international Division of Labor, the American school tends to work mostly on Indo-European and its putative close relatives. Greenberg’s Eurasiatic and Bomhard’s “Nostratic” are basically extended Indo-European, even though Bomhard does not like my description of his “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European (see below). On the other hand, the Russian school tends to work mostly on the lump of languages called Sino-NaDene-Caucasic. This Division of Labor is an over-simplication of reality, as Greenberg also worked on Amerindian and “Indo-Pacific” languages, while the Russian school produces papers, wordlists and monographs on a large variety of languages (African, etc). It can also be noted that Roger M. Blench produces sketches on lesser-known and endangered languages from Africa or India. Needless to emphasize that all these descriptive works (either by Blench or the Starostin Circus) are highly precious.
> > >
> > > 2. On the whole, the American and Russian schools agree on a number of toxic idiocies. The worst of these toxic idiocies is the notion that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan. This toxic idiocy must urgently be dismissed.
> > > Among other objections, it must be underlined that Sino-Tibetan is not a clear and valid genetic node, in the first place. Needless to say that grafting more groups like NE Caucasic onto a probably invalid ST lump does not help.
> > > Quite clearly, Basque and NE Caucasic are closely related, as is shown by Bengtson (2017) – be it more or less adequately et avec plus ou moins de bonheur... – but the fact is no less clear that Euskaro-Caucasic is more closely related to IEan than to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan. Let’s put it simple: the Sino-NaDene-Caucasic lump is demented garbage.
> > > There are certainly several reasons why the relationship of IEan and Euskaro-Caucasic is not correctly recognized.
> > > The first obstacle is that Caucasology per se is not an easy field to get acquainted with and necessitates to speak or at least be able to read several languages (like Russian, German, etc). Besides, the reference work on Caucasic (NE+NW) – produced by S. Starostin and Nikolayev (Севернокавказский этимологический словарь, A Comparative Dictionary of North Caucasian Languages 1994) – is far from being reliable, especially as regards the reconstructions, which can be described as wildly overcreative, to remain polite. We can nevertheless be grateful that the materials are available and searchable at Starling.ru.
> > >
> > > 3. Another toxic idiocy, on which the American and Russian schools agree, is the number of series of stops posited for Nostratic. Even though they bicker about the phonetic nature of the series, they agree that the number should be three. I emphatically assert that this figure is doubtless false. Nostratic had two series: presumably a voiceless series and a voiced series. The glottalized series is a fiction. For that matter, the model of “Nostratic” proposed by Bomhard is flawed from the start. Many of his proposed sets of comparanda are false, and what is worse, many potential cognates are missing. On the whole, the most acceptable data in Bomhard are those involving voiceless (his th) and voiced (his dh) stops, plus liquids or nasals, and to a lesser extent laryngeals. One reason I describe Bomhard’s “Nostratic” as being extended Indo-European is that he erroneously projects the three series of PIE onto an extended perimeter of languages. This procedure is false, as I already criticized in 2010.
> > > https://diachronica.pagesperso-orange.fr/TMCJ_vol_1.1_Fournet_Review_of_Bomhard_2008.pdf
> > > “Nostratic” as proposed by Bomhard or the Starostin Circus can be described as a dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm. It contains two major and irremediable flaws: three series, retroprojected from PIE, and the gap between Caucasic and IEan. This dislocated Indo-Europeo-centric paradigm is worse than Ptolemy’s geocentric model, because the latter did not propose a dislocated world. Removing these two major flaws is the Copernican revolution I propose and will implement, hopefully with the help of other linguists.
> > >
> > > 4. True enough, several groups currently have three series of consonants (or more). But the fact is each group (IEan, Kartvelian, NE Caucasic, etc.) developped additional series – each group on its own – out of a more simple state of language, that had only two series. One of the urgent tasks of macrocomparison is to elucidate and describe how the additional series emerged in each group of Nostratic. Once this is done (presumably I’ll do it in the coming months or years), the relationship of IEan with NE Caucasic will become crystal clear.
> > >
> > > 5. Another toxic idiocy that cripples macrocomparison is the myth or dogma that, after some time, say 5,000 or 10,000 years, macrocomparison would allegedly become impossible. This dogma, propagandized by obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin, is just plainly false. They have no expertise nor experience in macrocomparison. Don’t expect a marxist to explain Latin mass.
> > >
> > > 6. Another toxic idiocy is the creationist isolationist bunker, in which the Indo-Europeanist crooks claim PIE has no close nor distant relatives, no ancestors, and Indo-European languages spread in a vacuum, having no substrates. This cryptonazi indo-germanisch myth must be eliminated.
> > > 2. What to get rid of (slowly)
> > >
> > > 7. It can be observed – en passant – that promoters of a connection between Burušaski and Yenisseian, like Bengtson or Blažek, have never published a side-by-side basic wordlist of both groups.. As a matter of fact, both groups share about nothing. The inclusion of Yenisseian in Euskaro-Caucasic is highly dubious.
> > >
> > > 8. Another problem is Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth, on which Greenberg’s Eurasiatic is based to a large extent. IEan is not a Siberian agglutinative language. For that matter, it has nothing to do with languages of the Ural-Altaic type. The MeTu myth is to a large extent a pareidolic delusion. Needless to say that there is nothing good to expect from the maximally head-shrunken wordlist: me, tu, one, two, three, dog, salt, à la Starostin-Yakhontov.
> > >
> > > 9. To some extent, basic wordlists are an issue, especially when used in the most idiotic way, as the head-shrinking Starostin Circus routinely does. Basic wordlists should be used for comparative purposes, not for unreliable glottochronological calculations. It is just wondrous that the Starostin Circus calculates a 6,000 year distance between Hurrito-Urartian and NE Caucasic languages, when Hurrito-Urartian is not a member of NE Caucasic in the first place.
> > >
> > > 10. A reliable laryngeal-oriented reconstruction of Proto-Uralic is in urgent need. Regrettably the most competent Uralicists stick to a retarded vowel-oriented Pokornyan format. Besides, one needs to understand why Samoyedic shares only 250 words with Finno-Ugric. This is unbelievably low. I suspect that a number of metatheses occurred in Finno-Ugric that blur cognacy, with both Samoyedic and Nostratic. For example, (only FU) *walk- is possibly from *lawk- ‘white’, or (only FU) *witti ‘five’ from *tiw-ti ‘the big (thumb)’, or (only FU) *wed- ‘to kill’ from *dhew- ‘to die’. The *CvW- pattern underwent metathesis in FU, certainly, some other patterns also did. I expect the number of shared cognates will increase, once the metatheses in FU have been described.
> > >
> > > To summarize, the Copernican prerequisites for Nostratic studies are:
> > >
> > > - dismiss the toxic idiocy that NE Caucasic (i.e Nakh-Daghestan) would not be related to Indo-European, its neighbor, but would allegedly be more closely related to (far-away) Sino-Tibetan.
> > > - dismiss the toxic idiocy that Nostratic would have three series of stops, instead of two (as I propose).
> > > - elucidate the phonetics paths of each group, out of a simple state of language, that had only two series.
> > > - dismiss Pronominal Fetichism, especially the MeTu myth.
> > > - dismiss the dogma that only shallow-dating comparisons are possible..
> > > - ignore obscurantist nihilist shitheads, like Lyle Campbell or Alexander Vovin.
> > >
> > >
> > >  
> > > 3. A few definitions
> > >
> > > PIXA : Proto-Exo-African. According to archeology and paleoanthropology, some 60-50,000 years ago, “modern” man stepped out of Africa and began to spread in Eurasia and beyond. At present, it is not possible to determine if PIXA was a single language, or if there is more than one PIXA, for example PIXA1 would have crossed the Sinai and PIXA2 would have crossed the Red Sea and reached the south of the Arabic Peninsula. The parsimonious hypothesis is that there is only one PIXA.
> > > It is unclear at this point how many branches PIXA has. Two clear branches are Post-Rhotic and NW Pre-Rhotic.
> > >
> > > Nostratic : a broad synonym for “Proto-World”. PIXA is technically more precise, for non-African languages.
> > > Nostratic has at least two branches: PIXA and PENA (= Proto-Endo-African). It is unclear at this point how many branches of PENA exist. Chamito-Semitic (or Afrasian) is one of them.
> > >
> > > PIE : Proto-Indo-European, the ancestor of Post-Anatolian and Anatolian languages.
> > > IPS : Improved Proto-Sanskrit, the great-daughter of PIE, fraudulently sold as being PIE by the Indo-Europeanist crooks.
> > >
> > > Post-Rhotic : at some point, inherited *-s- changed to -r-, word-medially and word-finally in the prehistory of PIE. This group includes PIE, Hurrito-Urartian and Sumerian.
> > >
> > > NW Pre-Rhotic : this is a short name than Euskaro-Caucasic for the family including Basque, Caucasic (NE+NW), Burušaski, and probably also Siouan.
> > >
> > > Macro-Kartvelian : includes Kartvelian and, probably Etruscan and a good deal of Pre-Greek.
> > >
> > >
> > > 4. What PIXA looked like
> > >
> > > The following system (of 24 phonemes) is my reference for PIXA :
> > >
> > > 1. Obstruents: p t ǩ k (voiceless stops)
> > > bh dh ğh gh (voiced stops)
> > > s / z c / ʒ (sʒibilants)
> > > 2. Resonants: m n (nasals)
> > > w y l
> > > (d)ɮ (t)ɬ (lateral fricatives)
> > > 3. Laryngeals:
> > > velars H2- [ḫ] H2+ [ġ]
> > > pharyngeals H1 [ḥ] H3 [ˁ]
> > > glottals H4 [ˀ]
> > >
> > > Each branch of Nostratic has its own phonetic signature as regards especially the sʒibilants and lateral fricatives.
> > > As can be seen, PIXA did not have a phoneme *r. For that matter, each branch of Nostratic developped /r/ out of a different inherited phoneme. These phenomena: sʒibilants, lateral fricatives and /r/ are of utmost relevance and importance.
> > >
> > >
> > > (to be continued)
> > Thank You for your clear statement.
> >
> > I don't know enough to have an opinion other than that this Nostratic research seems to be based on very flimsy foundations.
> >
> > But I could be wrong. Keep up the good work.
> I firmly believe that I have understood how to proceed and to a large extent, I've cracked the problem, even though there's now a lot of work to do on each language or family. I think I have the right toolbox to solve the Nostratic question.
> I have the right system and I've begun writing a sketch for Siouan, Basque, Caucasic, PIE, Hurrito-Urartian, Kartvelian and Uralic, explaining the phonetic path of each of these branches. There's no doubt these languages are related and share quite a lot. I expect this sketch will be ready by end of year 2022. I will probably prepublish installments for each branch gradually, to be discussed.
> At this point, I need to get partners or disciples, because the job is too big for one person. I need to "evangelize" a number of competent linguists and get them to work on the right track.
> I've already written a dictionary of the PIE roots attested in Hurrian, and I can somehow rapidly transform it into a general dictionary of Pre-PIE. This could be done, maybe by 2024.
> I need partners, and maybe I can think of some people who could take Uralic or Altaic in charge.
> I don't expect much from Indo-Europeanists, who I consider are crooks and liars for the most part, quite conceited on top of the rest. I'll do myself the job of reconstructing the common ancestor of Siouan, Basque, Caucasic, PIE, Hurrito-Urartian, Kartvelian. I expect considerable resistance to my theory among Indo-Europeanists. But anyway I don't care. I don't need them..
> Those idiots have not even accepted the fourth laryngeal, nor my claim that Hurrian is the sister language of PIE. So I guess Nostratic is just too big for them to taste.
> It's possible I can recruit someone on ST, after I showed him how to proceed on Old Chinese. The person I think of is competent on ST and looks fairly open-minded. So he might respond positively.
> Bomhard is now very old, and I don't think he's going to accept my Copernican revolution. He accuses me of "grandstanding", so he'll just have to see his approach going to the grave.
> I'm not sure if Bengtson or the Starostin Boys will accept it either. We'll see. In all cases, the Starostin Boys are clearly a reservoir of personel, but I'm not sure they will easily shift to my system. I'm not sure the younger Starostin will easily accept that what his father wrote is false, to a very large proportion. Somehow, it's win-all or bust.
> Maybe Blazhek can get onboard. We'll see.
> If I can "evangelize" a couple of competent linguists, then my theory will gain momentum.
> In all cases, I'm recruiting...


Click here to read the complete article
Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<84105a29-9a93-49e6-b1a4-2bc5960fd574n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14530&group=sci.lang#14530

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:6115:b0:2f1:d8fa:84aa with SMTP id hg21-20020a05622a611500b002f1d8fa84aamr5945508qtb.689.1650244130827;
Sun, 17 Apr 2022 18:08:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a4a:e217:0:b0:329:b0d:c32d with SMTP id
b23-20020a4ae217000000b003290b0dc32dmr2916109oot.34.1650244130355; Sun, 17
Apr 2022 18:08:50 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 18:08:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4b844d15-6c9a-4544-b2f6-994dfb437ffan@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:1006:b06a:f201:52f6:6c59:2bcf:8338;
posting-account=EMmeqwoAAAA_LjVgdifHm2aHM2oOTKz0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:1006:b06a:f201:52f6:6c59:2bcf:8338
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <5a4b1e85-dc22-4481-8692-994b4c57f709n@googlegroups.com>
<4a114861-93bc-402b-b48c-dad4935f97b7n@googlegroups.com> <4b844d15-6c9a-4544-b2f6-994dfb437ffan@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <84105a29-9a93-49e6-b1a4-2bc5960fd574n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: daud.de...@gmail.com (Daud Deden)
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 01:08:50 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 47
 by: Daud Deden - Mon, 18 Apr 2022 01:08 UTC

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:45:32 PM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> Le dimanche 17 avril 2022 à 18:05:09 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:22:25 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> > > Le dimanche 17 avril 2022 à 15:39:38 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > > > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:45:00 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> >
> > > > > I don't expect much from Indo-Europeanists, who I consider are crooks
> > > > > and liars for the most part,
> > > > "How to win friends and influence people"
> > > > > quite conceited on top of the rest. I'll do myself the job of reconstructing
> > > > > the common ancestor of Siouan, Basque, Caucasic, PIE, Hurrito-Urartian,
> > > > Of all the dozens of Western Hemisphere language families, why only Siouan?
> > >
> > > Siouan is demonstrably a close relative of Basque.
> > It may have close relatives elsewhere in North America.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siouan_languages#External_relations
> yes, Yuchi is quite certainly related to Siouan.
> >
> > Note the mention o0f "Sprachbund" there. Variationist, typological,
> > and areal linguistics are casting serious doubt on the methodology
> > of comparative linguistics -- which was founded on languages attested
> > thousands of years before the present.
> > > > > Kartvelian. I expect considerable resistance to my theory among Indo-
> > > > > Europeanists. But anyway I don't care. I don't need them.
> > > > Do you recognize that the reason IE and Semitic reconstruction worked
> > > > so well is that they had written records thousands of years old for many
> > > > of the branches?
> > > Have you ever heard that IEan speakers flooded Europe?
> > > > ***
> > > > Please set a 72-character line length.
> > >
> > > No idea what the problem is.
> > Your endless paragraphs are hundreds of characters long and
> > do not quote readably.
Basqota.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<bdd04639-521f-47e2-9a7a-28d83e9f5283n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14531&group=sci.lang#14531

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2683:b0:69c:8c9c:5f80 with SMTP id c3-20020a05620a268300b0069c8c9c5f80mr5580783qkp.367.1650252101881;
Sun, 17 Apr 2022 20:21:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:478d:b0:d4:6806:953 with SMTP id
c13-20020a056870478d00b000d468060953mr5461805oaq.80.1650252101541; Sun, 17
Apr 2022 20:21:41 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 20:21:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <e1f8469a-c2ce-48a2-96d1-1064e535966fn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:49c6:e37d:3181:d13;
posting-account=aSvcbwoAAADuTTuNpgwK5PoqH8BpbsBl
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:49c6:e37d:3181:d13
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<e1f8469a-c2ce-48a2-96d1-1064e535966fn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <bdd04639-521f-47e2-9a7a-28d83e9f5283n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: fournet....@wanadoo.fr (Arnaud Fournet)
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 03:21:41 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 53
 by: Arnaud Fournet - Mon, 18 Apr 2022 03:21 UTC

Le lundi 18 avril 2022 à 00:29:16 UTC+2, DKleinecke a écrit :
> On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 9:45:00 PM UTC-7, Arnaud Fournet wrote:

> > > But I could be wrong. Keep up the good work.
> > I firmly believe that I have understood how to proceed and to a large extent, I've cracked the problem, even though there's now a lot of work to do on each language or family. I think I have the right toolbox to solve the Nostratic question.
> > I have the right system and I've begun writing a sketch for Siouan, Basque, Caucasic, PIE, Hurrito-Urartian, Kartvelian and Uralic, explaining the phonetic path of each of these branches. There's no doubt these languages are related and share quite a lot. I expect this sketch will be ready by end of year 2022. I will probably prepublish installments for each branch gradually, to be discussed.
> > At this point, I need to get partners or disciples, because the job is too big for one person. I need to "evangelize" a number of competent linguists and get them to work on the right track.
> > I've already written a dictionary of the PIE roots attested in Hurrian, and I can somehow rapidly transform it into a general dictionary of Pre-PIE. This could be done, maybe by 2024.
> > I need partners, and maybe I can think of some people who could take Uralic or Altaic in charge.
> > I don't expect much from Indo-Europeanists, who I consider are crooks and liars for the most part, quite conceited on top of the rest. I'll do myself the job of reconstructing the common ancestor of Siouan, Basque, Caucasic, PIE, Hurrito-Urartian, Kartvelian. I expect considerable resistance to my theory among Indo-Europeanists. But anyway I don't care. I don't need them.
> > Those idiots have not even accepted the fourth laryngeal, nor my claim that Hurrian is the sister language of PIE. So I guess Nostratic is just too big for them to taste.
> > It's possible I can recruit someone on ST, after I showed him how to proceed on Old Chinese. The person I think of is competent on ST and looks fairly open-minded. So he might respond positively.
> > Bomhard is now very old, and I don't think he's going to accept my Copernican revolution. He accuses me of "grandstanding", so he'll just have to see his approach going to the grave.
> > I'm not sure if Bengtson or the Starostin Boys will accept it either. We'll see. In all cases, the Starostin Boys are clearly a reservoir of personel, but I'm not sure they will easily shift to my system. I'm not sure the younger Starostin will easily accept that what his father wrote is false, to a very large proportion. Somehow, it's win-all or bust.
> > Maybe Blazhek can get onboard. We'll see.
> > If I can "evangelize" a couple of competent linguists, then my theory will gain momentum.
> > In all cases, I'm recruiting...
> Were I younger I might help you but at my age (95) I do not start new
> projects. I wont even be able to finish the ones I have started.
>
> However I wish you luck on your enterprise.
Thank you for nice words.
I'm younger than you, but I'm also thinking that I should focus on a limited set of projects, because I won't finish them, if they are too many.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14532&group=sci.lang#14532

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:caa:b0:441:2e8f:f398 with SMTP id s10-20020a0562140caa00b004412e8ff398mr6996513qvs.61.1650265446008;
Mon, 18 Apr 2022 00:04:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:3114:b0:5e6:d1bd:7ed7 with SMTP id
b20-20020a056830311400b005e6d1bd7ed7mr3460923ots.270.1650265445765; Mon, 18
Apr 2022 00:04:05 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 00:04:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:49c6:e37d:3181:d13;
posting-account=aSvcbwoAAADuTTuNpgwK5PoqH8BpbsBl
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:49c6:e37d:3181:d13
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: fournet....@wanadoo.fr (Arnaud Fournet)
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 07:04:06 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 58
 by: Arnaud Fournet - Mon, 18 Apr 2022 07:04 UTC

Le dimanche 17 avril 2022 à 15:39:38 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:45:00 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
>
> > I don't expect much from Indo-Europeanists, who I consider are crooks
> > and liars for the most part,
> "How to win friends and influence people"

I'd like to develop on this point.
Some Uralicists, with whom I've discussed some of my ideas, tend to respond that my ideas best apply to Pre-PU, not to PU itself, which indeed may be partially true. In other words, a discussion with Uralicists is possible, and they react to my ideas in a way that makes sense (at least to them). No matter the level of (dis)agreement, what matters most is that a discussion is possible.
Now, what frustrates me, baffles me, etc. is the absolute inability of Indo-Europeanists to discuss anything. This field increasingly strikes me as being a kind of sect with a petrified (and erroneous) dogma.
I'm not the only one to say that the field has a problem. For example, Adiego in 2015 wrote that Indo-European studies are in crisis [his words], because the beautiful model built by Brugmann et al is unable to integrate Hittite. To be in crisis is the polite way of stating that the field is a structural fraud [my words]. Personally, I describe this beautiful model built by Brugmann as being IPS = Improved Proto-Sanskrit. IPS is *doubtless* not the same thing as PIE. Basically, current IEanists are crooks who sell horse meat beef lasagna, their product is fraudulent and is not what the package claims it is. This fraud has been ongoing for about a century.
Another point is absolute sectarian blind-deaf-mute-ness. I've proposed a number of things:
1. Hurrian is a sister-language of PIE and its closest relative
2. the pseudo-decipherment of Carian is garbage
3. the received theory about the reflexes of velars in Hittite is false, and leads to statistical aberrancies
4. there's a fourth laryngeal *H4 with its specific profile
5. the three series of PIE can be reduced to only two (at a stage ancestral to PIE)
6. the stock-breeding vocabulary of IEan languages is of Caucasic origin
It must be emphasized that a discussion of any of these important (and IMO valid) points has *never* taken place.
In other words, it's **impossible** to initiate a discussion with IEanists.
I believe it's probably easier to discuss Nostratic issues with a Sino-Tibetologist than with an IEanist...
That's why I now consider this field to be a sect of crooks with a petrified (and erroneous) dogma.
It's as if, the more you show IEanists that something is wrong in the dogma, the more they petrify and bunkerize their erroneous dogma.
This field is a deadlocked sect of pigheads, crooks and liars (with a couple of cryptonazis in the backyard...).
This field is now thoroughly unscientific and entirely unable to sustain what makes a field scientific, namely discussion and debate of the principles, methods, results, achievements, concepts, etc.
I've no idea how this situation can be remedied. I'm afraid nobody involved in the field will have the superhuman force of acknowledging that the field is a structural fraud and that it has to take a completely renewed course.. Le désespoir est une folie, but I must say I'm quite disheartened at this point.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14533&group=sci.lang#14533

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1111:b0:2f1:fd04:b12 with SMTP id e17-20020a05622a111100b002f1fd040b12mr3968970qty.424.1650298888841;
Mon, 18 Apr 2022 09:21:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:b288:b0:e2:b735:56bb with SMTP id
c8-20020a056870b28800b000e2b73556bbmr4664730oao.27.1650298888593; Mon, 18 Apr
2022 09:21:28 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 09:21:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=100.8.211.134; posting-account=tXYReAoAAABbl0njRzivyU02EBLaX9OF
NNTP-Posting-Host: 100.8.211.134
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: gramma...@verizon.net (Peter T. Daniels)
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:21:28 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 85
 by: Peter T. Daniels - Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:21 UTC

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 3:04:07 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> Le dimanche 17 avril 2022 à 15:39:38 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:45:00 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> >
> > > I don't expect much from Indo-Europeanists, who I consider are crooks
> > > and liars for the most part,
> > "How to win friends and influence people"
> I'd like to develop on this point.
> Some Uralicists, with whom I've discussed some of my ideas, tend to respond that my ideas best apply to Pre-PU, not to PU itself, which indeed may be partially true. In other words, a discussion with Uralicists is possible, and they react to my ideas in a way that makes sense (at least to them). No matter the level of (dis)agreement, what matters most is that a discussion is possible.
> Now, what frustrates me, baffles me, etc. is the absolute inability of Indo-Europeanists to discuss anything. This field increasingly strikes me as being a kind of sect with a petrified (and erroneous) dogma.
> I'm not the only one to say that the field has a problem. For example, Adiego in 2015 wrote that Indo-European studies are in crisis [his words], because the beautiful model built by Brugmann et al is unable to integrate Hittite. To be in crisis is the polite way of stating that the field is a structural fraud

No, it is not. Why would any IEist want to interact with someone
who says things like that?

> [my words]. Personally, I describe this beautiful model built by Brugmann as being IPS = Improved Proto-Sanskrit. IPS is *doubtless* not the same thing as PIE. Basically, current IEanists are crooks who sell horse meat beef lasagna, their product is fraudulent and is not what the package claims it is. This fraud has been ongoing for about a century.

Why would any IEist want to interact with someone
who says things like that?

> Another point is absolute sectarian blind-deaf-mute-ness. I've proposed a number of things:

You have _proposed_ many things. You have _demonstrated_
or _argued plausibly_, for none of them. Instead, you immediately
descend to invective and insult.

> 1. Hurrian is a sister-language of PIE and its closest relative
> 2. the pseudo-decipherment of Carian is garbage
> 3. the received theory about the reflexes of velars in Hittite is false, and leads to statistical aberrancies
> 4. there's a fourth laryngeal *H4 with its specific profile
> 5. the three series of PIE can be reduced to only two (at a stage ancestral to PIE)
> 6. the stock-breeding vocabulary of IEan languages is of Caucasic origin
> It must be emphasized that a discussion of any of these important (and IMO valid) points has *never* taken place.
> In other words, it's **impossible** to initiate a discussion with IEanists.

Why would any IEist want to interact with someone
who says things like that?

> I believe it's probably easier to discuss Nostratic issues with a Sino-Tibetologist than with an IEanist...
> That's why I now consider this field to be a sect of crooks with a petrified (and erroneous) dogma.
> It's as if, the more you show IEanists that something is wrong in the dogma, the more they petrify and bunkerize their erroneous dogma.
> This field is a deadlocked sect of pigheads, crooks and liars (with a couple of cryptonazis in the backyard...).
> This field is now thoroughly unscientific and entirely unable to sustain what makes a field scientific, namely discussion and debate of the principles, methods, results, achievements, concepts, etc.

Why would any IEist want to interact with someone
who says things like that?

> I've no idea how this situation can be remedied. I'm afraid nobody involved in the field will have the superhuman force of acknowledging that the field is a structural fraud and that it has to take a completely renewed course. Le désespoir est une folie, but I must say I'm quite disheartened at this point.

I did not fail to notice that you responded to only one of the
points I made in my message. I probably should go back to
ignoring you.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<925358cc-a6ba-4008-ad4d-26fc2557c05fn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14534&group=sci.lang#14534

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5f46:0:b0:2f3:371f:7cd with SMTP id y6-20020ac85f46000000b002f3371f07cdmr244236qta.94.1650324531711;
Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:42d2:b0:e5:e38c:5af7 with SMTP id
z18-20020a05687042d200b000e5e38c5af7mr3294452oah.163.1650324531459; Mon, 18
Apr 2022 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.goja.nl.eu.org!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:440:df8:44b2:19ff;
posting-account=aSvcbwoAAADuTTuNpgwK5PoqH8BpbsBl
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:440:df8:44b2:19ff
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com>
<45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <925358cc-a6ba-4008-ad4d-26fc2557c05fn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: fournet....@wanadoo.fr (Arnaud Fournet)
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:28:51 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 86
 by: Arnaud Fournet - Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:28 UTC

Le lundi 18 avril 2022 à 18:21:30 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 3:04:07 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> > Le dimanche 17 avril 2022 à 15:39:38 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> > > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:45:00 AM UTC-4, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't expect much from Indo-Europeanists, who I consider are crooks
> > > > and liars for the most part,
> > > "How to win friends and influence people"
> > I'd like to develop on this point.

> > I'm not the only one to say that the field has a problem. For example, Adiego in 2015 wrote that Indo-European studies are in crisis [his words], because the beautiful model built by Brugmann et al is unable to integrate Hittite. To be in crisis is the polite way of stating that the field is a structural fraud
> No, it is not. Why would any IEist want to interact with someone
> who says things like that?
Indo-European studies are a structural fraud since the discovery of Hittite..
The situation is as if physics would discover new particles but would not change the old model in order to integrate the new particles.
That's what IEanists have done: they still have their old Improved-Proto-Sankrit that can't integrate Hittite.
That's why the field is fundamentally a fraud.
> > [my words]. Personally, I describe this beautiful model built by Brugmann as being IPS = Improved Proto-Sanskrit. IPS is *doubtless* not the same thing as PIE. Basically, current IEanists are crooks who sell horse meat beef lasagna, their product is fraudulent and is not what the package claims it is. This fraud has been ongoing for about a century.
> Why would any IEist want to interact with someone
> who says things like that?
> > Another point is absolute sectarian blind-deaf-mute-ness. I've proposed a number of things:
> You have _proposed_ many things. You have _demonstrated_
> or _argued plausibly_, for none of them. Instead, you immediately
> descend to invective and insult.
> > 1. Hurrian is a sister-language of PIE and its closest relative
On Hurrian I have written a book listed about 600 PIE roots shared by Hurrian and IEan languages.
Previously I had written a draft with Allan R. Bomhard in 2009.
> > 2. the pseudo-decipherment of Carian is garbage
I wrote a paper in 2009 but so far it has always been censored.
> > 3. the received theory about the reflexes of velars in Hittite is false, and leads to statistical aberrancies
I wrote a paper explaining that something is definitely wrong.
> > 4. there's a fourth laryngeal *H4 with its specific profile
I wrote a paper that lists more comparanda than I originally dreamt of, but got no reaction.
> > 5. the three series of PIE can be reduced to only two (at a stage ancestral to PIE)
Again, I wrote a paper, but got no reaction.
> > 6. the stock-breeding vocabulary of IEan languages is of Caucasic origin
Again, I wrote a paper, but got no reaction.
> > It must be emphasized that a discussion of any of these important (and IMO valid) points has *never* taken place.
> > In other words, it's **impossible** to initiate a discussion with IEanists.
> Why would any IEist want to interact with someone
> who says things like that?
The issue is not me, but them.
> > I believe it's probably easier to discuss Nostratic issues with a Sino-Tibetologist than with an IEanist...
> > That's why I now consider this field to be a sect of crooks with a petrified (and erroneous) dogma.
> > It's as if, the more you show IEanists that something is wrong in the dogma, the more they petrify and bunkerize their erroneous dogma.
> > This field is a deadlocked sect of pigheads, crooks and liars (with a couple of cryptonazis in the backyard...).
> > This field is now thoroughly unscientific and entirely unable to sustain what makes a field scientific, namely discussion and debate of the principles, methods, results, achievements, concepts, etc.
> Why would any IEist want to interact with someone
> who says things like that?
The issue is not me, but them.
> > I've no idea how this situation can be remedied. I'm afraid nobody involved in the field will have the superhuman force of acknowledging that the field is a structural fraud and that it has to take a completely renewed course. Le désespoir est une folie, but I must say I'm quite disheartened at this point.
> I did not fail to notice that you responded to only one of the
> points I made in my message. I probably should go back to
> ignoring you.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<elms5hhekssdbf23dr8emagilc2kht77s5@4ax.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14536&group=sci.lang#14536

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: rh...@rudhar.com (Ruud Harmsen)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 08:46:50 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <elms5hhekssdbf23dr8emagilc2kht77s5@4ax.com>
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com> <9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com> <ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com> <45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com> <925358cc-a6ba-4008-ad4d-26fc2557c05fn@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="49948c5e97d23c4db6f58c4bf39e644c";
logging-data="31997"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19eQy+u50FJnR80cxmjTZO/"
Cancel-Lock: sha1:DzPfpQis3ttjsa9DtXA4+lP5tT0=
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
 by: Ruud Harmsen - Tue, 19 Apr 2022 06:46 UTC

Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet
<fournet.arnaud@wanadoo.fr> scribeva:

>Indo-European studies are a structural fraud since the discovery of Hittite.
>The situation is as if physics would discover new particles but would not
>change the old model in order to integrate the new particles.
>That's what IEanists have done: they still have their old Improved-Proto-Sanskrit
>that can't integrate Hittite.
>That's why the field is fundamentally a fraud.

Factually incorrect:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hittite_language#Classification

Views vary.

--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<0e3c445a-a9b9-4af5-843e-b193319f610bn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14537&group=sci.lang#14537

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:3ce:b0:2f1:fd16:751b with SMTP id k14-20020a05622a03ce00b002f1fd16751bmr6775295qtx.197.1650376820980;
Tue, 19 Apr 2022 07:00:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:23b3:b0:604:23a7:1a26 with SMTP id
m19-20020a05683023b300b0060423a71a26mr5731605ots.14.1650376820731; Tue, 19
Apr 2022 07:00:20 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 07:00:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <elms5hhekssdbf23dr8emagilc2kht77s5@4ax.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=100.8.211.134; posting-account=tXYReAoAAABbl0njRzivyU02EBLaX9OF
NNTP-Posting-Host: 100.8.211.134
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com>
<45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com> <925358cc-a6ba-4008-ad4d-26fc2557c05fn@googlegroups.com>
<elms5hhekssdbf23dr8emagilc2kht77s5@4ax.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <0e3c445a-a9b9-4af5-843e-b193319f610bn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: gramma...@verizon.net (Peter T. Daniels)
Injection-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:00:20 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 19
 by: Peter T. Daniels - Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:00 UTC

On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 2:46:53 AM UTC-4, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
> Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet
> <fournet...@wanadoo.fr> scribeva:

> >Indo-European studies are a structural fraud since the discovery of Hittite.
> >The situation is as if physics would discover new particles but would not
> >change the old model in order to integrate the new particles.
> >That's what IEanists have done: they still have their old Improved-Proto-Sanskrit
> >that can't integrate Hittite.
> >That's why the field is fundamentally a fraud.
>
> Factually incorrect:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hittite_language#Classification
>
> Views vary.

That paragraph doesn't bear on AF's (factually incorrect) point that
PIE has not been reinvented to take into account Hittite. He also
seems unaware that Tocharian, discovered about the same time,
was also quite problematic for the field.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<f206e260-51f8-4852-9782-29b0e9e27b2en@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14538&group=sci.lang#14538

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:d42:b0:441:831b:fa1b with SMTP id 2-20020a0562140d4200b00441831bfa1bmr11922972qvr.130.1650388453953;
Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:14:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a54:4116:0:b0:322:be31:2ce6 with SMTP id
l22-20020a544116000000b00322be312ce6mr1694810oic.275.1650388453559; Tue, 19
Apr 2022 10:14:13 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:14:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <elms5hhekssdbf23dr8emagilc2kht77s5@4ax.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:21d2:94ae:87df:f4e5;
posting-account=aSvcbwoAAADuTTuNpgwK5PoqH8BpbsBl
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:21d2:94ae:87df:f4e5
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com>
<45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com> <925358cc-a6ba-4008-ad4d-26fc2557c05fn@googlegroups.com>
<elms5hhekssdbf23dr8emagilc2kht77s5@4ax.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <f206e260-51f8-4852-9782-29b0e9e27b2en@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: fournet....@wanadoo.fr (Arnaud Fournet)
Injection-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:14:13 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 by: Arnaud Fournet - Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:14 UTC

Le mardi 19 avril 2022 à 08:46:53 UTC+2, Ruud Harmsen a écrit :
> Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet
> <fournet...@wanadoo.fr> scribeva:
> >Indo-European studies are a structural fraud since the discovery of Hittite.
> >The situation is as if physics would discover new particles but would not
> >change the old model in order to integrate the new particles.
> >That's what IEanists have done: they still have their old Improved-Proto-Sanskrit
> >that can't integrate Hittite.
> >That's why the field is fundamentally a fraud.
> Factually incorrect:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hittite_language#Classification
>
> Views vary.

This paragraph does not contradict what I say.
It's a kind of extremely mild and smooth way of presenting what I say.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<84240226-ff25-49a4-8852-d51b9e27b3d5n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14539&group=sci.lang#14539

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5c4d:0:b0:2e0:71b7:2829 with SMTP id j13-20020ac85c4d000000b002e071b72829mr11401593qtj.323.1650389992897;
Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:39:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a81:c443:0:b0:2d0:dfa3:9ed9 with SMTP id
s3-20020a81c443000000b002d0dfa39ed9mr16313990ywj.220.1650389992758; Tue, 19
Apr 2022 10:39:52 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:39:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <0e3c445a-a9b9-4af5-843e-b193319f610bn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:21d2:94ae:87df:f4e5;
posting-account=aSvcbwoAAADuTTuNpgwK5PoqH8BpbsBl
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:21d2:94ae:87df:f4e5
References: <aaede801-0bd4-4126-b8ba-8ea9fda1bb9bn@googlegroups.com>
<9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com>
<45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com> <925358cc-a6ba-4008-ad4d-26fc2557c05fn@googlegroups.com>
<elms5hhekssdbf23dr8emagilc2kht77s5@4ax.com> <0e3c445a-a9b9-4af5-843e-b193319f610bn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <84240226-ff25-49a4-8852-d51b9e27b3d5n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: fournet....@wanadoo.fr (Arnaud Fournet)
Injection-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:39:52 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 77
 by: Arnaud Fournet - Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:39 UTC

Le mardi 19 avril 2022 à 16:00:22 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 2:46:53 AM UTC-4, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
> > Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet
> > <fournet...@wanadoo.fr> scribeva:
>
> > >Indo-European studies are a structural fraud since the discovery of Hittite.
> > >The situation is as if physics would discover new particles but would not
> > >change the old model in order to integrate the new particles.
> > >That's what IEanists have done: they still have their old Improved-Proto-Sanskrit
> > >that can't integrate Hittite.
> > >That's why the field is fundamentally a fraud.
> >
> > Factually incorrect:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hittite_language#Classification
> >
> > Views vary.
> That paragraph doesn't bear on AF's (factually incorrect) point that
> PIE has not been reinvented to take into account Hittite.
No, I'm factually correct about the history of the field.
Here's Adiego (2016):
[Quote] as early as in 1921 Emil Orgetorix Forrer noted that Hittite created a serious problem for the Brugmannian model (Forrer 1921)
[Quote] § 4. Evidently, these problems are peccata minuta compared with the earthquake caused by the simple comparison of Hittite morphology to Brugmann’s reconstructed PIE:
1. The nominal inflection was very different from the PIE proposed before the interpretation of the Hittite language: [...]
2. In the verbal inflection, the Anatolian situation is even more deviant from the Brugmannian reconstruction:
[me] I emphasize that it's not me who writes this.
[Quote] § 6. Some criticisms of the ‘Schwund’-hypothesis are based on an impressionistic approach to language evolution and, despite their popularity, are very weak. Firstly, this hypothesis has been associated with a ‘conservative’ or ‘old-fashioned’ view of PIE by the fact that it leaves the Brugmannian reconstruction of PIE basically unaltered.
Here's Fortson IV (2010):
9.4. The main difficulty posed by Anatolian for Indo-Europeanists is the fact that its structure is quite different from that of PIE as traditionally reconstructed. One would ordinarily expect that the oldest known languages of the family should resemble the proto-language the most closely; and it is true that Anatolian does preserve a number of important archaisms, notably consonantal reflexes of at least one (and probably two) of the three laryngeals and productive classes of neuter r/n-stems. But most striking are the forms and categories that it does not have. Absent are such apparently bedrock IE formations as simple thematic verbs, the aorist, the perfect, the subjunctive, the optative, the dual, the *-tó-verbal adjective, and the comparative in *-jos-. [Emphasis mine] Additionally, some inherited grammatical forms function differently from their congeners in the rest of IE: endings identifiable with those of the IE perfect are used to form a class of presents (the so-called hi-conjugation; §9.12); and the *-nt-participle, which has active voice in the other IE languages, is passive in Anatolian.
One interpretation of these facts is that the forms missing from Anatolian were simply lost, and that the traditional reconstruction of PIE is perfectly valid. But evidence has been growing that Anatolian split off at a time when the development of some of these categories (such as the s-aorist) was only nascent. Under this view, PIE went through some subsequent development before achieving its “classic” look; the “missing data” of Anatolian are then partly attributable to loss, and partly to their not having existed yet. An early version of this theory was propounded by the American Indo-Europeanist Edgar Sturtevant, who thought Anatolian was a sister of reconstruct-ed PIE and that both were derived from a language he called “Indo-Hittite” (a term that later fell out of favor). [End quote]
[me =>] Note how confused the sentence: “Under this view, PIE [in fact Improved-Proto-Sanskrit] went through some subsequent development before achieving its ‘classic’ look”, actually is.

He also
> seems unaware that Tocharian, discovered about the same time,
> was also quite problematic for the field.
yes, Tocharian is also an issue for Improved-Proto-Sanskrit.

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<1q006hlfnf3t2nastac3105l90f2qg2nf8@4ax.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14540&group=sci.lang#14540

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: rh...@rudhar.com (Ruud Harmsen)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 14:58:17 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <1q006hlfnf3t2nastac3105l90f2qg2nf8@4ax.com>
References: <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com> <ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com> <45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com> <925358cc-a6ba-4008-ad4d-26fc2557c05fn@googlegroups.com> <elms5hhekssdbf23dr8emagilc2kht77s5@4ax.com> <0e3c445a-a9b9-4af5-843e-b193319f610bn@googlegroups.com> <84240226-ff25-49a4-8852-d51b9e27b3d5n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="f850ac0345581683eeb1bb7620c15983";
logging-data="12684"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+IXJZo6C4dVcn2Vai0SDDI"
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xG0O/qMtaLeFBBYkqgGrSgCzx4c=
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
 by: Ruud Harmsen - Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:58 UTC

Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:39:52 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet
<fournet.arnaud@wanadoo.fr> scribeva:
>One would ordinarily expect that the oldest known languages of the family should resemble the proto-language the most closely;

Among Semitic languages, Akkadian is old, but not as conservative as
the much later Arabic.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<vs006h1plu7qqr4p4jumk6ru1rifacro5c@4ax.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14541&group=sci.lang#14541

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: rh...@rudhar.com (Ruud Harmsen)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 15:00:21 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <vs006h1plu7qqr4p4jumk6ru1rifacro5c@4ax.com>
References: <9ec79e68-0768-48cc-8bb7-7925298e58acn@googlegroups.com> <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com> <ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com> <45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com> <925358cc-a6ba-4008-ad4d-26fc2557c05fn@googlegroups.com> <elms5hhekssdbf23dr8emagilc2kht77s5@4ax.com> <f206e260-51f8-4852-9782-29b0e9e27b2en@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="f850ac0345581683eeb1bb7620c15983";
logging-data="14083"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18zhYz8M/Js2AxycBnUHPns"
Cancel-Lock: sha1:OcKG0aM8dQk1clV5F0Vhn9BLYX4=
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
 by: Ruud Harmsen - Wed, 20 Apr 2022 13:00 UTC

Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:14:13 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet
<fournet.arnaud@wanadoo.fr> scribeva:

>Le mardi 19 avril 2022 à 08:46:53 UTC+2, Ruud Harmsen a écrit :
>> Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet
>> <fournet...@wanadoo.fr> scribeva:
>> >Indo-European studies are a structural fraud since the discovery of Hittite.
>> >The situation is as if physics would discover new particles but would not
>> >change the old model in order to integrate the new particles.
>> >That's what IEanists have done: they still have their old Improved-Proto-Sanskrit
>> >that can't integrate Hittite.
>> >That's why the field is fundamentally a fraud.
>> Factually incorrect:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hittite_language#Classification
>>
>> Views vary.
>
>This paragraph does not contradict what I say.
>It's a kind of extremely mild and smooth way of presenting what I say.

So "Indo-European studies are" NOT "a structural fraud since the
discovery of Hittite", but as I said, views vary, and the field is in
motion. It is only natural that extra data requires extra
explanations.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<ba4da3ba-ce47-4c34-b3a2-f453077c4bd0n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14542&group=sci.lang#14542

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1381:b0:69e:bd47:9e73 with SMTP id k1-20020a05620a138100b0069ebd479e73mr6364054qki.561.1650465710351;
Wed, 20 Apr 2022 07:41:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:19a:b0:605:46ec:949b with SMTP id
q26-20020a056830019a00b0060546ec949bmr6710335ota.56.1650465710109; Wed, 20
Apr 2022 07:41:50 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 07:41:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1q006hlfnf3t2nastac3105l90f2qg2nf8@4ax.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=100.8.211.134; posting-account=tXYReAoAAABbl0njRzivyU02EBLaX9OF
NNTP-Posting-Host: 100.8.211.134
References: <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com>
<45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com> <925358cc-a6ba-4008-ad4d-26fc2557c05fn@googlegroups.com>
<elms5hhekssdbf23dr8emagilc2kht77s5@4ax.com> <0e3c445a-a9b9-4af5-843e-b193319f610bn@googlegroups.com>
<84240226-ff25-49a4-8852-d51b9e27b3d5n@googlegroups.com> <1q006hlfnf3t2nastac3105l90f2qg2nf8@4ax.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <ba4da3ba-ce47-4c34-b3a2-f453077c4bd0n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: gramma...@verizon.net (Peter T. Daniels)
Injection-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 14:41:50 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 23
 by: Peter T. Daniels - Wed, 20 Apr 2022 14:41 UTC

On Wednesday, April 20, 2022 at 8:58:20 AM UTC-4, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
> Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:39:52 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet
> <fournet...@wanadoo.fr> scribeva:

> >One would ordinarily expect that the oldest known languages of the family should resemble the proto-language the most closely;
>
> Among Semitic languages, Akkadian is old, but not as conservative as
> the much later Arabic.

Phonologically. The verbal system seems more Afroasiatic-like
than the highly elaborated Arabic.

Comparative linguistics has been revolutionized in recent decades
with the investigation of unwritten languages that were in close
(i.e. multilingual) contact with distantly or un- related languages
-- areal and typological studies -- IE and Semitic (except in Ethiopia)
are quite exceptional among the world's languages in that respect,
basically not having any -- and it has become clear that the methodology
based on the clear family trees (except in Germanic) and very old sources
doesn't work universally.

(Last year I had to become immersed in the linguistics of African
languages, where this sort of investigation is aggressively pursued.
Greenberg's "four phyla" have in considerable part been abandoned.)

Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01

<c0dc63e5-eb41-4b05-8eaf-62b28c09fb57n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=14543&group=sci.lang#14543

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.lang
X-Received: by 2002:a37:bf04:0:b0:69e:6243:f141 with SMTP id p4-20020a37bf04000000b0069e6243f141mr12951942qkf.229.1650468766179;
Wed, 20 Apr 2022 08:32:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:13d2:b0:322:73bd:400e with SMTP id
d18-20020a05680813d200b0032273bd400emr1921896oiw.97.1650468765875; Wed, 20
Apr 2022 08:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 08:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1q006hlfnf3t2nastac3105l90f2qg2nf8@4ax.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:440:df8:44b2:19ff;
posting-account=aSvcbwoAAADuTTuNpgwK5PoqH8BpbsBl
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a01:cb00:d34:bd00:440:df8:44b2:19ff
References: <11a8b369-7ee3-4184-8300-338a96c574f0n@googlegroups.com>
<ee9ae63f-1dfd-4ec7-97fe-f83501bf3f82n@googlegroups.com> <8d0970c4-6158-489a-ac70-433796c5c57fn@googlegroups.com>
<45e17b6e-8047-4974-84b9-ff3a9062e96an@googlegroups.com> <925358cc-a6ba-4008-ad4d-26fc2557c05fn@googlegroups.com>
<elms5hhekssdbf23dr8emagilc2kht77s5@4ax.com> <0e3c445a-a9b9-4af5-843e-b193319f610bn@googlegroups.com>
<84240226-ff25-49a4-8852-d51b9e27b3d5n@googlegroups.com> <1q006hlfnf3t2nastac3105l90f2qg2nf8@4ax.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c0dc63e5-eb41-4b05-8eaf-62b28c09fb57n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: The Linguistic Chronicles of Copernicus # 01
From: fournet....@wanadoo.fr (Arnaud Fournet)
Injection-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 15:32:46 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 11
 by: Arnaud Fournet - Wed, 20 Apr 2022 15:32 UTC

Le mercredi 20 avril 2022 à 14:58:20 UTC+2, Ruud Harmsen a écrit :
> Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:39:52 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet
> <fournet...@wanadoo.fr> scribeva:
> >One would ordinarily expect that the oldest known languages of the family should resemble the proto-language the most closely;

NB: I did not write this, I quoted what Fortson IV himself wrote.

> Among Semitic languages, Akkadian is old, but not as conservative as
> the much later Arabic.

Pages:12
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor