Re: [tied] Re: Etymology of PIE *ph2ter

From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 42714
Date: 2006-01-02

----- Original Message -----
From: "etherman23" <etherman23@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 8:57 PM
Subject: [tied] Re: Etymology of PIE *ph2ter



> > ***
> > Patrick:
> >
> > Interpretation? What do you think the infant intends to convey?
> >
> > ***
>
> The infant isn't trying to convey anything. It's babbling. Hence
> Brian's use of the word babbling. When someone is making an ink blot
> for a Rohrshach test, what information is he tring to convey? None.
> But that doesn't stop people from interpreting the ink blots.

***
Patrick:

That in what unholy sense is anything being "interpreted"?

Gosh, even I know that infants 'babble' but thanks for setting the record
straight.

Infants babble. Certain babbling like *ma is reinforced by the parents for
the meaning 'mother'. Why ma rather than goo or wee or pooo? because parents
have that simple word in their vocabulary; it being simple, they teach it
first.

In other words, the parents have a vocabulary that they consider appropriate
for an infant to learn first; and they teach it.

When the child is older, they repeat the process with more complex words
like wawa and then water.

What is the big mystery?

***
***