[Nostratic-L] Re: Why are Indo-Europeanist opposed to a "proto-lang

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
wrote:

>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: mkelkar2003<mailto:smykelkar@...>
> To: Nostratic-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Nostratic-L@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 11:36 PM
> Subject: [Nostratic-L] Re: Why are Indo-Europeanist opposed to a

"prto-language" for all of humanity

>
>
> --- In

Nostratic-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Nostratic-L@yahoogroups.com>,
"etherman23" <etherman23@> wrote:

> >
> > I think the reason is probably because there's no convincing

evidence

> > that Proto-World ever existed.
> >
>
>

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/babel.htm<http://home.entouch.net/dmd/babel.htm>

>
> http://www.zompist.com/langorg.htm<http://www.zompist.com/langorg.htm>
>
> http://ehl.santafe.edu/ruhlen.htm<http://ehl.santafe.edu/ruhlen.htm>
>
>

http://faculty.ed.umuc.edu/~jmatthew/articles/mothertongue.html<http://faculty.ed.umuc.edu/~jmatthew/articles/mothertongue.html>

>
>

http://www.homestead.com/edenics/files/origin9.doc<http://www.homestead.com/edenics/files/origin9.doc>

>
> M. kelkar
>
>
> ***
> Patrick:
> Brian was challenged 16 hours ago to show where just one of my

reconstructed monosyllables (Proto-Language) was "unlikely" to be
associated in a large number of languages with a given set of related
meanings. A fairly modest task.

>
> After his having made wide-reaching (but, apparently empty)

generalizations such as that made above by Etherman, Brian seems
reluctant to put his mind or tongue to this task.

>
> Inquiring minds want to know!
>
> Why?
>
> ***

There are two major flaws with your reconstruction of Proto-World.
First, each of your monosyallables is given several meanings. The very
first one, *?a, can mean "forehead, brow, face, here, this (near
speaker), across, at, location, abut, be in contact with, (plant-)top
(foliage), nuclear family, straight, bird's beak, interrogative,
inanimate stative, 'be adjective';" With so many meanings for each
monosyallable I doubt speakers of such a language could even
understand each other! The second problem is after you form words out
of these monosyllables you then have to stretch the semantics to get
any kind of match. For example you give *?a-p?o, family+swollen =
phallus = (grand)father. Here's another one. *?e-mha-ro, tooth+bite
off+part=hoe.