Re: [tied] O lumpers lump, and splitters split, and never the twain

----- Original Message -----

From: Glen Gordon

To: cybalist@egroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 9:24 AM

Subject: [tied] More tidbits about the painfully obvious origins of IndoEuropean

 

Call *this* an argument? Laughable. Besides, Glen, as regards IE/Uralic and IE/Tyrrhenian relationships, I concede that they are more likely than any alternative groupings. I don't find the evidence sufficient to accept them wholeheartedly, that's all. There's quite a lot evidence in favour of these connections, but all of it rather weak. Circumstantial evidence can easily be misused, hence the tendency to distrust or even exclude it. Sometimes the most likely hypothesis is still not plausible enough to win general acceptance. You won't convert sceptics by pleading, less likely still by insulting them. You once asked me to tell you straight out what kind of evidence I'd regard as fully convincing. I satisfied your curiosity on that occasion and see no reason to repeat myself.

 

Piotr

 

 

 

Glen wrote:

 

Piotr:
------
Your denial of IE-Uralic relationships or even IE-Tyrrhenian relationships
is a typically conservative and unfortunately popular view that only serves
to avoid the painful process of logical deduction. Afterall, thought can be
tiresome.

The view is also getting very out-of-date given that the unknowns are slowly
melting away as more and more is known about IE. I assume that you
understand that comparative linguistics is a theoretical science so if
you're expecting 100% absolutes to any given theory, you'll be waiting
forever for the truth to hit you on the head. Therefore, let's deduce the
likeliest theory rather than giving in to apathy.

Now, let's see...

  We could say that IE was _always_ where it was: Huh?? Come on,
   time for a reality pill. Next!

  We could say that the IE are from Europe: Completely unfounded
   linguistically. Laughable.

  We could say that IE came from Anatolia: definitely unfounded
   linguistically. Another laugh.

  We could say that IE came from the steppes: supported by some
   deeply engrained similarities in pronominal systems, grammar
   and, if I have my way, numerical systems, between IE and
   Uralic/Altaic. These similarities have been continuously
   outlined by Nostraticists for a century and cannot be ruled
   out as coincidences or even "convergeance", given the volume
   of evidence that is so easy to deny if you're lazy.