Re: Stacking up on standard works

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <bm.brian@...> wrote:

>
> Having read some of Larry Trask's detailed demonstrations of
> Bengtson's incompetence in dealing with Basque, I am not
> disposed to accept much of anything that he says on the
> subject. And in any case it's *your* understanding of the
> comparative method that's at issue, not Bengtson's.
>

Although I'm very critic about Bengtson's work, at the same time I must
acknowledge he's one of the pioneers in the matter. Unfortunately,
Basque has tons of loanwords from other languages, including
Vasco-Caucasian ones such as Iberian. Worse yet, he chose to bypass
Mitxelena's Paleo-Basque entirely because it didn't fit in his theory.

> > I must repeat Basque isn't part of NEC or North Caucasian,
> > but in any case a somewhat distant relative.
>
> Then why on earth do you imagine that Starostin's PNC can
> reasonably approximate Proto-Vasco-Caucasian?
>

There's a number of reasons. For example, while PNC has a huge consonant
inventory, Basque has a very reduced inventory, lacking e.g. voiced
fricatives. There're also some hints that Sino-Tibetan could be an
offspring of PNC rather than a sibling as in Starostin's
"Sino-Caucasian".