[tied] Re: Proto Vedic Continuity Theory of Bharatiya (Indian) Lang

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "mkelkar2003" <smykelkar@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
> >
> > Reverting to a seriously meant consideration, my question here
> > is in how far do Romanes and Sinti languages match the actual
> > Indic languages from point of view of the phonetic aspect. The
> > comparation appears to be interesting regarding the lexical
> > data as well since even if the Sinti and Roma loaned a lot of
> > words from the people they are living within or lived with, the
> > core components of the lexical appears to remain their own .
> > I am not sure on the morphological aspect of the language, in
> > how far these languages have been affected by the languages
> > around them.
>
> No is ever going to answer these questions. So don't hold your
> breath.

The answer, whatever it is, neither lends anything nor
takes anything away from your own argument, but which
wasn't Alex's intent in any case, as he writes above
"Reverting to a seriously meant consideration", meaning
that nothing he wrote was seriously intended as support
for your claims.

You're trying to insinuate, of course, that an honest
answer to his question would lend something to your own
argument, and so will surely be suppressed, but which
you couldn't possibly know unless you already knew the
answer to that question yourself. If you really know
the answer to Alex's question yourself, then why don't
you simply answer Alex yourself.

Of course you don't know the answer, and probably don't
even understand the nature of the question, but hope by
responding as you have to convince others of a cover up
of some sort.

Such tactics are dishonest, underhanded, and despicable.

David