Re: Which Manansala? (was [tied] a(i)s-)

On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 11:12:04 -0000, tgpedersen@... wrote:

>--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>>Rosenfelder does not advocate any
>>alternative "theory" of his own. What he shows is that a "method"
>>based on counting eye-catching resemblances cannot be a reliable
>>procedure at all.
>
>In order to get a set of words into Marc Rosenfelder's Procrustean
>theory, ....
>And BTW, you may point out for the umpteenth time that no, no,
>Rosenfelder shows that you can't use "similarity" in linguistics. But
>I agree, he does; unfortunately in the process he has shown
>that "proper" linguistics is impossible too. That's why I called for
>a modification of his theory.

It is *not* a theory.

Marc states it very clearly in the article:

"To analyze a claim about language relationship based simply on
resemblances (as opposed, of course, to one based on the comparative
method), we can apply the principles and formulas developed above."