Re: Re[2]: [tied] searching for common words for all today's langua

From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 43290
Date: 2006-02-07

It has now been approximately 24 hours since I challenged
 
Brian
 
to "prove that any _one_ (sic!) of these (monosyllables) among the unaspirated series (45) is unlikely"
 
to be associated with the constellation of meanings I have assigned to it; and with these meanings, can be seen in several different languages.
 
So far, I have not even seen an acknowledgment that he knows of the challenge, let alone a refusal to debate the "obvious" (remember that dodge, folks?).
 
It appears "beneath him" even to mention that it is "beneath him".
 
Should this situation persist, I think some members will find it material in evaluating Brian's pronouncement:
 
"all demonstrable traces of such a link must have been destroyed"
 
and its truth value.
 
 
Patrick
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [tied] searching for common words for all today's languages

 
----- Original Message -----
To: ytielts
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 10:22 AM
Subject: Re[2]: [tied] searching for common words for all today's languages

 
<snip>

> Thanks for your reply, Brian. It is generally agreed by
> most mainstream anthropologists that homo sapiens sapiens
> originates in Africa. That means that all their
> descendants should have used a common language somewhere
> in Africa.

Not necessarily, no.  But it's a reasonable working
hypothesis, so long as one remembers that that's *all* it
is.

> There should be a genetic link between all the
> present-day languages. Don't you agree?

It doesn't matter whether there is or not: for the reasons
given above, all demonstrable traces of such a link must
have been destroyed millennia ago.

Brian

***
Patrick:
 
There you go again, Brian, asserting what _you_ have _never_ attempted to prove.
 
You say "all demonstrable traces of such a link must have been destroyed".
 
Prove it.
 
I challenge you to prove it.
 
I have 90 monosyllables at
 
 
Prove that any _one_ (sic!) of these among the unaspirated series (45) is unlikely.
 
Are you scholar enough to do it?
 
***