[tied] Re: Creole Romance? [was: Thracian , summing up]

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
wrote:

> At 5:19:25 AM on Saturday, July 5, 2003, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> >> And even if it were not parallel, it would demonstrate
> >> the original point, that a sharp break in the visible
> >> evidence does not *necessarily* imply a sharp break in
> >> the underlying object.
>
> > I don't know where you got that idea from.
>
> It is exactly the possibility of a visible sharp break
> coexisting with continuous underlying change that you
> professed not to understand. I've given you an example.
> Apparently because it isn't exactly the situation that you
> have in mind, you refuse to recognize (or at least to admit)
> that the example in fact establishes the possibility. At
> this point I consider it your problem, not mine.
>

When did I profess not to understand "the possibility of a visible
sharp break coexisting with continuous underlying change"?
I don't think I have denied that possibility, since I have alway
believed it was possible. Who are you arguing against here?

Torsten