From: Rick McCallister
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:
> No one ever said Trask was infallible, least of all him.
Then why'd you say: He was a scholar who never made a pronouncement that he couldn't back up 100%.
I guess there's a distinction between being infallible and never saying anything w/o evidence, but that's what I tried to show was wrong.
I disagreed with him over what I saw as loanwords to and from Celtic and possibly the ancestor of Lusitanian (some non-Celtic IE language). But he held out for the best possible evidence.
The best ev. shows the opposite of what he said for my examples. The rejection of *agriny/agrany- makes no sense, no matter why he did it. What are you trying to prove? All I wanted to show was that he did at least some things wrong, so no belief he had about Basque is proven just because he thought it.
If those of you who slight Trask or have never read him did the same, you'd enjoy the respect of everyone on the list.
No one has ever done really good work on Proto-Basque, or almost any proto-language, but me.