Re: [tied] The Precise and scientific nature of PIE reconstruction.

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 13:56:19 +0000, mkelkar2003
<smykelkar@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

>> We can now choose to reconstruct *snusá: or *snusós. If the
>> proto-form was *snusá:, we have to explain why this word,
>> denoting a female person, acquired the normally masculine
>
>
>The NORMALLY masculine ending! Gotcha! Obviously what is "normal" is
>decided by majority rule

Nonsense. There's no such consideration as "majority rule".
Even if only _one_ attested language had show *snusos, and
all the others *snusa:, the reconstruction would have to be
*snusos. What matters in comparative linguistics are the
_irregularities_ that give insight into previous stages of
the language.

The ending *-os happens to be productively masculine in
_all_ Indo-European languages where the concept of masculine
is relevant. The existence of remnant feminines in *-os,
like *snusos, shows that this was not always the case.

>Let us mess up this pretty picture of language families. There might
>be another word in say Swahili that must be included in the
>reconstruction also. You must check every single living or dead
>language ever spoken on earth and that has a cognate include that in
>your families.

>Greek, Albanian, Armenian and Latin could be a "family" because they
>don't have the beginning s in the word. Sanskrit and Russian can be
>a family for they have the ending correct.

I see. You have no idea what you're talking about.

>WHERE these languages are spoken TODAY and by WHO should play no
>role in how the language families are constructed.

That is correct.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...