Re: [tied] Re: etruscan, Lydian and Greek inscriptions

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 5288
Date: 2001-01-04

Dear John,
 
I love heresy. There would be no progress without it. There's nothing wrong about being heretical as long as you have a clear idea of what your heresy is opposed to. In science, earlier scholarship must be acknowledged and respected even if you are going to launch a revolution. Enthusiasm can't make up for ignorance. Only people who don't understand maths spend sleepless nights with a ruler and compass trying to square the circle.
 
If you know nothing about standard decipherment methods and the pitfalls awaiting a naive enthusiast like you, if you can't be bothered to discuss earlier decipherments, if you've never done any serious philological work, and don't seem to be interested in other people's methods and results (even if you'd read Friedrich more attentively you'd be able to see why your own results are illusory), if (as your analyses of Ukrainian words sufficiently prove) you have no grasp whatsoever of the history and structure of your own language -- how can we discuss anything meaningfully? We lack *any* common ground. You are only fooling yourself with your arbitrary Ukrainian(?!)/Lydian/Etruscan comparison. With such "methods" (actually your only tool is unrestrained imagination) you could easily interpret any text in terms of any language.
 
Piotr
 
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: oko@...
To: cybalist@egroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 10:45 PM
Subject: [tied] Re: etruscan, Lydian and Greek inscriptions

--- In cybalist@egroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@......> wrote:
> Your choice. Pity. Competent linguists have no monopoly of
knowledge, but they have a good research methodology, worked out over
a period of 200 years. You should learn a lot before you start
turning
things by 180 degrees, just as you'd have to study physics for years
before attempting a revolutionary revision of General Relativity. I
did have a look at your decipherment methods. They ignore all the
rules of conduct which are obligatory in serious linguistics. It
would
be a waste of time to explain why, since most of the people on this
list, even those without much linguistic training, can see it at a
glance.
>
> Piotr

The result of my approach produced verifiable result, which is 180
degrees out of phase with the accepted linguistic methodology. I am
not professional linguist and never claimed to be one. I am just
enthusiast interested in the enigma in  decipherment.
In the past 200 years great progress has been made in linguistic
field. Many problems have been resolved but not all. I do believe that
any problem can be solved if correct approach is taken.
Yes, this is my heresy by using unorthodox approach which I posted in
my
home page. There are many thousands different Etruscan inscriptions
one can read and understand by using my approach. The same is true for
Lydian and Greek inscriptions.
Yes, I did commit linguistic heresy. But I am not guilty of violating
the obligatory rules of  serious linguist. However I am guilty of
reviewing obligatory methods and decided to use not yet tried
approach, hence committed serious linguistic heresy.
However, deep in my hart I do feel guilty but not because I took
linguistically wrong approach.

               John