Re: Etruscan and IE (was Re: [tied] Re: Names of a few Celtic Deiti

----- Original Message -----
From: "glen gordon" <glengordon01@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 2:46 PM
Subject: Re: Etruscan and IE (was Re: [tied] Re: Names of a few Celtic
Deities)


> Patrick:
> > Incorrect. The _basis_ for the reconstructed
> > monosyllables and their meanings in the
> > Proto-Language is analyses of attested words and
> > reconstructed roots of words in attested languages.
>
> No, your basis is your whimsical _interpretation_ of
> the attested words and reconstructed roots of words
> in attested languages. As such, Proto-Language and
> Proto-World are not all that different. Both are not
> based on the same linguistic science taught at
> universities around the entire globe. So what
> philosophy then are they based on if not science?
>
>
> > [...] in one example, *MO, a syllable I believe
> > originally meant 'flesh':
>
> Yes, you do *believe* this, I have no doubt. Belief
> is irrelevant. Only facts and logic are.
>
>
> > Based on the known fact that no people, never,
> > nowhere has named a divinity 'Days', unless the
> > Etruscans did.
>
> How many languages at the time of IndoEuropean named
> a deity "Sky father"? Your fact is valid but totally
> irrelevant to the discussion of Etruscan Tinia.
>
>
> = gLeN

***
Patrick:

I was not discussing Etruscan Tinia, only your mistaken suggestion of what
it might mean.

***