Re: Re[2]: [tied] *kW- "?"

----- Original Message -----
From: <mkapovic@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [tied] *kW- "?"


> >
> > Patrick:
> >> 'Markedness' is a useless concept.
> >> If it had any legitimacy, Khoisan could not exist
> >> with its very "marked" clicks.
> >
> > Brian:
> >> This is an absurd straw man.
> >
> > Patrick:
> >> Why do you not explain why this is absurd?
> >
> > Simple: Markedness shows that Khoisan clicks are
> > EXCEEDINGLY RARE, _not_ non-existent.
> >
> > Since Khoisan clicks are a REALITY, not a theory, we
> > must accept this rarity as a fact. Markedness is
> > not contradicted by this fact. Pay attention.
> >
> > IE is not a 'fact' but an ongoing theory. Since a
> > theory can never be accepted as absolute fact, it
> > must be _changed_ to suit reality because reality
> > cannot be changed to suit schizophrenia.
>
> If I get Patrick right, he's trying to say something like this: there are
> some languages in the world which have very unusual traits. But because we
> know for a fact that they exist, we cannot say that these feature cannot
> exists. But if we reconstruct some strange feature in a proto-language
> (and we reconstruct it because the evidence point to it), we tend to say -
> oh that can't be, there's no such language. Sure, typology is useful and
> markedness theory can be useful as well but sometimes they can set you on
> the wrong track.
>
> Mate

***
Patrick:

Thank you, Mate, it is gratifying to learn that, whether you agree or not
with my position, you do understand it.

***