george knysh wrote:
> *****GK: Dear Alex, I rather gather from Piotr's
> useful new Cybalist rules (see the beginning of the
> 2nd paragraph) that "long discussion of historicaly
> character" is quite within the parameters of the list
> as long as it respects e.g. points (3) and (5). And
> "linguistic aspects" which run afoul of these and
> other rules will not be welcome. So good luck with
> your Balkanika, but don't forget Cybalist.******
>
My intention was just to discharge cybalist and I waited with the
invitation of the people who are interested until I got the accept of
Pitr. If Piotr will agree to be the owner of balkanika, I will gladly
get all the rights to him.
I have a little trouble with the interpretation of point 3 "IDEES
FIXEX". One idee fixe can be/is my opinion that Romanian does not derive
from Latin but was influenced by this and they have an older layer which
is common to almost all the South of Europe from Black Sea until
Atlantic, in fact all Meidteraneean Space. On the basis of point 3 I
should not discusse any word which is accepted by the linguistic
comunity as comming from Latin or Greek ( wright or wrong) because in
this way I will violate the point 3.
The rest of the rules are absolutely OK.
alex