Re: Hachmann versus Kossack?

--- "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
wrote:

> >>
> >> What is the archeological support for Hungarians
> >> arriving from mid-Eurasia
> >> into Hungary ?
> >
> > GK: Read the literature. Why should I do your
> > homework for you?
> ==========
> All that is hypothesized on the Hungarians is 100%
> linguistic.

****GK: Wrong.****

> The route they followed, whom they met, etc is 100%
> linguistic.

****GK: Wrong. Aggressively ignorant.****

> If Hungarian was the only language left of Uralic,
> we would have no idea
> where it came from.
> The archeological file is = zero

*****GK: In your mind. Your knowledge of the
archaeology pertinent to the Hungarians is obviously
zero.****

> and anything archeological is just shreds to be
> interpreted in the light of
> linguistic considerations.

*****GK: And historical documents. Of which there are
many. (As you suddenly "remember" below. Doesn't help
though, since you seem as ignorant of these as of the
archaeology.)****

> Arnaud
> ============
>
> > GK: We have a pretty good idea about the
> various
> > places they came through before reaching Hungary.
> By
> > then they were a pretty complex lot, and became
> even
> > more so in the first century of their residence in
> the
> > old Avar heartland.
> >>
> >> Your reasoning does not even apply to a -known-
> case
> >> of intrusion.
> >
> > GK: It applies quite well thank you.
> =============
> See above.
> The archeological file is = zero.
> Everything is 100% linguistic-based.
> Arnaud

****GK: "Ignorance is bliss" (Orwell)****

> ======
> >> Where is your point final ?
> >
> > GK: Your theory of "Asiatic Germans" has no
> > archaeological backing whatsoever.
> ==========
> PT1 : I have not written Germans are Asiatic. This
> is your personal
> caricature.

****GK: Germans from Asia.****

> I maintain that proto-Germanic, as a language,
> displays significant
> connections with Tocharian, Tibetan, Early Uralic,
> Yenissei and Kartvelian
> and to account for that, Jastorf is just outright
> stupid.

****GK: Ignore Torsten's point, stay in your bubble
and be content.****

> PT2 : There is no archeological support for :
> Hungarian, Chuvash, Cremean
> Tatar, Turkish movements.
> All we think about these languages (and people) is
> 100% based on linguistic
> considerations (and historian chronicles when they
> exist).
> The archeological file is = zero.

****GK: Nietzche would say that the zero applies
elsewhere (:=))).*****

> Arnaud
> =============
>
> > This is politely commentable as -superficial-.
> >
> > GK: It's good enough. I'll be polite and not
> > comment on the quality of your thesis beyond
> what's
> > been stated.
> >
> =========
> The archeological file is = zero.
> Arnaud

****GK: Good bye Arnaud. Have a happy life.****

> ======
>
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com