Re[8]: [tied] Re: Renfrew's theory renamed as Vasco-Caucasian

At 12:06:19 AM on Friday, September 21, 2007, Rick McCallister wrote:

> "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...> wrote:

>> At 3:49:01 AM on Thursday, September 20, 2007, Rick
>> McCallister wrote:

>>> Even though Trask pointed out that much of Basque
>>> toponymy is of Celtic origin and possibly even the word
>>> Basque, he only considered about 5 or 10 Basque words to
>>> be of Celtic origin and refused to consider any other
>>> possible pre-Roman IE languages that were known to be in
>>> the area such as Lusitanian and Ligurian

>> How do you distinguish 'refused to consider' from 'gave
>> due consideration to and dismissed'?

> For many of the Celtic items, you cuold be right BUT he
> absolutely refused to even consider the possibility that
> other pre-Roman IE languages could have influeced Basque

This doesn't answer my question; it merely reiterates your
previous assertion.

> but there words that seems to correspond to non-Latin and
> non-Celtic

Brian