>gLeN wrote:
> > Piotr going to the SIL for answers:
> > Here are a few more lines from the SIL register of >languages:
>
>Just curious, is there anything wrong with SIL ?
>(This comment sounded as SIL was kinda unreliable)
Oh, I was just being me. SIL is okay. I wish however that there were more
linguistic sites like that available to compare information. I've heard from
some that there are little mistakes here and there on the site (which is to
be expected on such a large site). So, as usual, one has to be careful and
question every piece of information you're given, as with life in general.
Plus, SIL imposes one linguistic classification over another without any
written justification. It should be noted somewhere on the site that these
classifications are not written in stone or accepted by everyone since I'm
sure, it can confuse the linguist just starting out.
- gLeN
______________________________________________________