Re: Greater Pelasgia

Gerry here: I think the problem is that Mark and Glen are both talking
about the same Etruscan thing. The fact that something is or is not
translatable has to do with semantics not with fact. Mark makes the
point that once proper nouns are removed, the remainder in
unintelligable. Isn't this also true for many other languages? In
English, the nouns serve as items doing the action as well as items
being acted upon. Gather up all the conjunctions, prepositions,
interjections etc. and these words don't stand alone with any meaning.
OTOH, Glen cites texts, dictionaries, grammars etc. that are included in
any University library accessible via internet. Based on library
information, there appears to exist an Etruscan language that has been
analyzed for some time.

So, how do we resolve this dilemma? Hate to harken back to Ian Hodder
again but we need to attain a simultaneous fusion AND separation; i.e.
we need to fuse Mark's no, the Etruscan language has not been deciphered
with Glen's yes, we have grammars, dictionaries etc. present in almost
all University collections. The yes and no responses sit at opposite
ends of that broomstick and we need to scootch them closer to the
center.

Awaiting Glen's reply after he gets to the university tomorrow.

Gerry

Glen Gordon wrote:

>
> Mark:
> >I stand by my comments in message 1580, but suggest that the problem >is
> >the word 'decipherment'. We know what some individual Etruscan >words mean,
> >can distinguish between nouns, verbs and other parts of >speech, and can
> >pronounce these words with some reasonable accuracy. >But once you exclude
> >proper names, these words are at best obscure >in meaning. Being able to
> >recognize a verb is not the same as >knowing what that verb means.
> >
> >Etruscan remains largely untranslatable. If we can't translate it, >it's
> >undeciphered.
>
> What is Mark talking about?? This doesn't sound like the Etruscan I know at
> all. I plan on getting to the university tomorrow... uh erh today (12.45
> AM!) to check out some things, including that Etruscan book I saw. Etruscan
> IS translated - not like Latin, but still significantly so. Mark, I'll be
> awaiting your response from the previous message which requests you to
> accurately define "undeciphered", hopefully along with the current vague
> term "undecipherable". Even here, your views remain hazy - at what point is
> a language "translatable"? There are words in Sumerian and Latin which have
> vague meanings - are they undeciphered? Rubbish. Sounds more like an excuse
> to avoid coming face to face with your linguistic fantasies.
>
> - gLeN
>
> ______________________________________________________
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Planning a party? iParty.com is your complete source for party planning and
> supplies, with everything you need to throw the perfect party!
> http://click.egroups.com/1/1635/0/_/2431/_/951202522/
>
> -- 20 megs of disk space in your group's Document Vault
> -- http://www.egroups.com/docvault/cybalist/?m=1

--

Gerald Reinhart
Independent Scholar
(650) 321-7378
waluk@...
http://www.alekseevmanuscript.com