--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
wrote:
>
> You might want to consider what the late and, by me,
> at least, lamented Larry Trask thought about it all.
"By me, at least"?! You make it sound as if Trask weren't
widely appreciated and missed, which he most certainly is,
or that those who don't ascribe to your own theories are
somehow going against Trask by doing so, when the truth is
again quite the opposite.
It always amuses me how you try to invoke the late great
Larry Trask as your personal patron saint, and surely he
turns over in his grave every time you do!
> He was willing to concede that all languages stem from a single
> source just as human beings do;
Most of us in this argument concede the same, or at least
that the I.E. family is most likely related in some way
to others. I know that I certainly have, most recently at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/41286 .
So then what would you have us learn from Trask in that
regard that we don't already know?
> his major objection to Nostratic (and earlier groupings) was only
> that he did not think languages at such great time-depths could
> actually be reconstructed.
And I agree with Trask on that too, and so on both of your
points my thinking is closer to Trask's than yours. I ask
therefore again: in exactly what way do you imagine you're
privy to the wisdom of Trask that the rest of us are not?
Please invoke him no more.
David