Re: Why did Proto-Germanic break up?

>
>
> > It's not very important to me. I thought it was important to you,
> > based on your reaction.
>
> What upsets me is that people quote unjustified figures as if they

were

> facts. "30%" has become a widely circulated factoid in this way.

In the future I shall meticulously generate a random percentage in
the range 25-35% each time that question comes up, so that people
don't get the wrong impression.

>
> > What is the "ordinary" percentage of difficult-to-etymologise

roots

> > in an IE language then, ballpark figure?
>
> Something of the order of 10-20%, PERHAPS, but I don't want to be

remembered

> as the creator of a new factoid. Peter Trudgill once gave a

concrete figure

> as an estimate of the percentage of RP-speakers in Britain. He still
> shudders with embarrassment when people quote the figure and refer

to him as

> the expert who did the calculation: it was actually based on

regionally

> biassed data (all of it from Norwich!), and was probably grossly

inaccurate.

Peter Trudgill shouldn't have said that when his data were so biassed.

> > What do think of Rick
> > McAllister's now defunct list of non-IE roots in Germanic?
>
> Lots of them _are_ IE by any standards, some are doubtful, a few
>are really
> enigmatic.

IE by any standards? I don't recall that. I'll check when the
printout appears from my bookstacks.

Enough of these details. What do you think of the dispersal date of
the Germanic subbranches?

Torsten