Re: [tied] Re: Proto-Tsimshian

On 2006-12-16 04:12, Richard Wordingham wrote:

> Most of the words have meanings that don't keep their words well. On
> the basis of the evidence, I would say that Tsimshian was not
> Indo-European.

Neither would I. Loose semantics; comparison involving only root
etymologies (the "postscript" on morphology must be a joke); fortuitous
matches made more likely by alleged multiple mergers in Tsimshian plus
unconstrained "secondary correspondences" with the conditioning factors
"unexplained at present".

Piotr