From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 37487
Date: 2005-05-01
> ----- Original Message -----For discussion of Nostratic topics, there is the sister list
> From: cybalist@yahoogroups.com<mailto:cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> (2) Off-topic postings and pseudoscience
>
> Since this list is devoted to Indo-European studies, the discussion of extraneous or too general topics (e.g. other language families, the origin of language, long-range comparison etc.) will be discouraged. There are other lists where subjects like general linguistic, Nostratic studies, anthropology, etc., may be discussed more profitably. We assume that there is a nearly unanimous consensus among the list's managers and regular posters as to what should and what should not be discussed.
>
> <snip>
>
> I know that I am probably the poster who attempts to go back farther than anyone else but I have been trying to keep that within, I hope, reasonable limits.
>
> Butr frankly, some many of the other posters, when discussing pre-PIE, for example, are discussing matters so closely allied to Nostratic that I feel it would be a great loss to me to limit them.
>
> Here I refer to Miguel, and to a certain extent, others.
>
> I have personally been intrigued with the Austronesian information from Torsten, and have found valuable information for my purposes within them. I would hate to forego additional information from that source.
>
> I am as fascinated by PIE as anyone on this list, I believe, and if all we ever did was to work strictly from PIE evidence, I still would be interested in everyone's input.
>
> But I really believe that many questions in PIE and pre-PIE can only be furthered by a judicious use of material, or at least, information from what many of us seem to believe are more or less distantly related language families. The evidence for coming to probable hypotheses to "solve" some problems simply does not exist within the strict boundaries of PIE. The original vowel (quality) and consonant inventory being a notable example of such.
>
> Is it humanly possible that the scope of the list, officially, could be slightly broadened to continue in the same measured way that we have been de facto operating?
>
> I am hoping "yes" but I must warn that my will-power has never been strong enough to stop smoking which, I know now, has radically affected my health.
>
> Would it be appropriate to poll the members for their opinions?