Bomhard's Etruscan-IE relationships

Me:

>>Let me guess: You've judged the entire state of modern Nostratic >>studies
>>totally on Mr Greenberg, right?

Ed. Robertson:

>Well, yes, right city. I was thinking of Merritt Ruhlen actually.

Ruhlen and Greenberg are probably the weakest comparative linguists one can
find this side of UFO abductions. Some of their premises are reasonable but
the manner in which they do things is certainly undesirable for many.

>I didn't say that. I am not particularly well read up on Nostratic.
>But I don't go for Greenberg and Bomhard's 'proof' that Etruscan is
>closely related to IE either. And IS and Dolgopolsky have been pretty
>much superseded, no? There are some Nostraticists I respect. Alexis
>Manaster Ramer comes to mind.

Damn, and it's Ramer that I still haven't come across yet so I can't add
much to that. However, lumping Greenberg and Bomhard seems a little bizarre
for someone caught up on Nostratic studies. How are they the same? Speaking
on Bomhard, what in particular would you refute?

- gLeN

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com