Re: Yers

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Vassil Karloukovski" wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:

[...]

>> I've had a look at the site. Sorry, but so much of it is utter
>> rubbish that digging out any sensible information that might
>> hide there is hardly worth the effort. The author, among other
>> things, uses Sumerian and Celtic (in addition to comparison with
>> a random selection of Iranian words from various lanuages)
>
> you are probably right in general and there is a lot of rubbish
> there. The author, P. Dobrev, did exclude references to Sumerian
> in his later works and concentrated on Iranian and Caucasian words
> only, which is historically much more justified. But he shouldn't
> be judged too harshly, as he is not a linguist.

He is not judged. His writings are judged. Thus, one can deduce
something about reliability of his works. They belong to that
category of works not being trustworthy. Not being a linguist is
an explanation, not an excuse for producing low quality material.
No serious scholar would take into account a non-reliable work as
worthwhile theoretical construction since too many facts are to
be checked again.

> OK, the Celtic data are irrelevant (and probably false). Still,
> nobody has shown why the Turkic ordinals are more relevant to
> the treatment of the Bulgar ordinals from the Namelist than are
> the Indo-Iranian.

First one has to check if the data presented are correct both in
meaning and interpretation. Then one might discuss.

Regards,
Marius Iacomi