Re: IE & Nostratic "alternations"... yuck!

--- In cybalist@..., "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...> wrote:

>
> Torsten:
> >>Ooh, Nostratic? May I interject? Why are we speaking of
> >>Møller as though he were today an active linguist?
> >>
> >This is a criterion I haven't heard of yet.
> >Grimm is dead too. So Grimm's law no longer applies?
>
> No. I was just speaking in the context of Nostratic studies.
>
> Torsten:
> >>I personally do not welcome these kinds of "easy" sound
> >>correspondances in Nostratic.
> >
> >Should they be hard?
>
> Yes, there should be rules. When there are no rules, there's

anarchy and no

> one learns from anarchy. These "easy" sound correspondances don't

have any

> rules to them. It's just the whim of the Nostraticist.
>
> -gLeN
>
>
>
>

I said: "Should they be hard?". I didn't say "Should there be rules?"

Torsten