Re[2]: [tied] Re: Monovocalism: sequel

At 5:44:59 PM on Sunday, July 4, 2004,
enlil@... wrote:

[...]

> Semitic is a _theory_ by all accounts, and not as "real"
> as a living language, don't you? If you can agree, you
> must see that it cannot be used as evidence when
> discussing language universals which pertain to all
> languages living and dead, theoretical or not.

Nonsense. A reconstruction offers much weaker evidence than
a directly observable language, but it is not wholly without
evidentiary value.

Brian