Re: Pecularities of Steppe grammar etc.

Hakan: For every numeral, you show us a different mix of languages and reconstructed forms. Why don't you show what all the numerals looked like in all the languages you are referring to? Wouldn't this make it easier to weed out random similarities - and easier to see if all these languages really point to a common origin? Now it looks as if you - for every numeral - have deliberately picked those languages whose words for this numeral happen to resemble each other.

Glen: Well, yeah! Of course I have. What do you want me to do? Pick the ones that
look completely unrelated??? Have to start somewhere.

Now that's what I call a really honest answer!

Glen: ...you, as much as anyone else, can become (and are) a specialist of Nivkh. Afterall, "specialist" is in the eye of the beholder.

Hakan: This way of thinking opens up a lot of possibilities. Maybe I'm a specialist in heart surgery as well!

Glen: 'Fraid not. - - - Further, I don't believe that heart surgery is a theoretical
science. The heart is very much physical.

Too bad. But perhaps you'd like to hear me try playing the violin?

Glen: Anyways, point is, inanimate nouns were never _grammatically speaking_ the
subject and circumventive methods were used instead.

Got it.

Glen: It appears to many people, because of methodological
differences of opinion, that the theory that I present online is finished
and without room for progress... it's not finished and it will be evolving.

I've never regarded your theory as finished without room for progress (and I don't think anyone else has either). You say you're going to show all the numerals of all the languages you are referring to and that sounds like a good idea. I'll check your website in a couple of weeks to see what's happened since last time!

Hakan.