Re: Elamitist discovered? PLEEEZ NO!

"glen gordon" <glengordon0-@...> wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/cybalist/?start=1648

>
> Gee that Elamite book sure looks good, and I do read French... but

with this

> new-fangled e-commerce, I feel so vulnerable to inevitable change. :P
>
> >Elamitist uncovered
> >
> >Have a look at http://www.efes.net.tr/lostlanguages/
> >
> >Dr. Selahi Diker (email sdiker@...) is of the belief that
> >Elamite was an early Altaic language, related to Turkic. Maybe
> >en-route to the Eurasiatic, Glen.
> >
> >What do you people feel about inviting him to the list?
>
> I view his confusion to be the result of the underlying reality that

Altaic

> and Elamite are indeed related but far more distantly than he

realizes. This

> is stemming from issues of proper sub-classification of the

Eurasiatic

> languages.
>
> Now it's not exactly reasonable to be assuming Elamite is Altaic, let

alone

> close to Turkic! Let's me just check out this site and...
>
> OH MY GOD!!! THIS MAN HAS FLIPPED HIS NOGGIN!!! I'm sorry, no way!

Get this

> freak away from the list. We want an _informed_ Elamitist, not one

prone to

> asserting that Armenian is a Turkic language! Did he get his doctoral

title

Well, I agree with Glen that this guy is horrible. Just another racist
turk that wants to "scientifically" prove that armenians and Kurds are
turks and therefore should logically belong to turkey. He tries to read
aramean with turkic (there was also another guy that wanted to read
scandinavian runes with rukic), to prove that turkish was an "ancient"
language (whereas all languages, you will agree are equally ancient,
apart from esperanto). It is easy, because there are no vowels and no
punctuation signs. However, the guy could have at least tried to write
in old turkic and not in anotolian turkish ! It is a ridiculous fake by
a man ignorant of everything in linguistics as there are so many on the
net, but nonetheless trying to show off and sell books.

Guillaume