Re: Real or Spurious Root Matches? (was OE *picga)

--- In cybalist@..., "Richard Wordingham" <richard.wordingham@...>
wrote:

> --- In cybalist@..., "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> > --- In cybalist@..., "Richard Wordingham"
> <richard.wordingham@...>
> > wrote:
> > > --- In cybalist@..., "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> > > > --- In cybalist@..., Piotr Gasiorowski
> <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: tgpedersen
> > > > > To: cybalist@...
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 1:05 PM
> > > > > Subject: [tied] Re: OE *picga
> > > > >
> > > > >
>
> Torsten:
> That's not fair. You're supposed to analyse each language back to
> the earliest stage reachable with your ability. I don't think

you've

> done that for the English set of roots.
>
> Richard:
> Doesn't that rule only apply to valid searches for genetic

cognates?

> The Sundaland argument for comparing Bagirmi and English is weak;
> what the argument would justify is doing a Bagirmi-Austronesian
> comparison. (Any Bagirmi speakers on the list?)
>

I think behind your 'valid' is a wish to introduce a reasonability
metric to be applied on the locations of the two languages in
question before one considers actually comparing roots. All I say is
that the shortest actual travel time (by sea for the periods in
question) instead of mere terrestrial contiguity should be part of
that metric?

>
> Torsten:
> As for Sundaland reachability, there are plenty of Chadic words on
> my site, e.g. for the notorious *bH/p-r/l- root(s).
>
> Richard:
> Where wasn't reachable?
>
> (I hope it wasn't just in the Americas - American languaguages tend
> not to have 100-word lists. Is it because Morris Swadesh was a
> communist?)

Help - the reds are coming!

>
> Richard.

Torsten