From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 2138
Date: 2000-04-17
----- Original Message -----From: Glen GordonSent: Monday, April 17, 2000 7:48 AMSubject: [cybalist] Discussion
So much for netiquette. Since you have spoken thrice, there's probably no
need to explain how I noticed some of my errors as well as some innocent
goofs that some would find understandable in a less hostile environment. I
am accepting some of your input. But it doesn't appear to be worth my time
to discuss anything further with you when your preference in unfairly
labeling me as the stereotypical internet nut is far too apparent with kind
phrases like "bloody liar", "indefensible", etc.
It would be nice if I had references to a concise listing of IE paradigms
whether online or not (which I don't) or have the money to order some good
(and expensive) sources from somewhere. It would be appreciated of you if
you could better define this new idea you've given me of the triple meaning
of "aspect" a little better but I'm going to start expending more energy in
my fulltime job and take a much needed pause from this list.
Go nail someone else to a stake.
Hey, Glen,(in case you haven't unsubbed yet)I lost my patience when you plainly ignored my remarks which were meant as a bona fide correction. How do you intend to learn anything if on being corrected you just repeat the same errors and insist you MUST be right whatever the evidence to the contrary? The plain English word for what your reconstruction was is INDEFENSIBLE. But before I said it straight out I used weaker terms. It was easy enough to ask me to explain to you in more detail what was wrong with the table rather than make me read it again as if I couldn't understand what you meant the first time.I'm not rich either. I have gleaned whatever knowledge I have from various sources, sometimes deciding to buy a book, more often just making notes in a library. It's the kind of knowledge that takes years to collect. When you write I'm "so confused" about something YOU don't know very much about, it's a bit cheeky, isn't it? Have you got some sort of licence to be rude to people? You've done it many times. Why do you get so plaintive when it happens to you?No, I don't think you are an ordinary Internet nut. I can see you are smart enough to do some thinking on your own, and that's a rare gift these days. But you should realise the extent of your ignorance before you start revolutionising historical linguistic studies. I don't mean to offend you by implying that you are VERY ignorant. My own ignorance is abysmal, and even the best experts know very little in comparison with what they'd like to know. But they realise that, and so tend to be modest and cautious in their opinions.Piotr