I've just finished reading his interesting paper. It
seems to me that someone who has been working on these
issues for twenty odd years might have come up with
something worth discussing. Since I am not a linguist
but a historian of political ideas, I don't exactly
feel qualified to plausibly comment on this. What do
our specialists think? Perhaps leaving aside the
Fournetian comparisons to Arabic and Semitic
generally, or the implications of distinct infix
patterns in Uralian, just concentrating on the PIE and
IE aspects. Do you think this theory of infixes helps
to demonstrate: (a) a closer affinity between IE
languages than postulated by comparativist orthodoxy?
(b) a better means of accounting for differentia than
sustratal or loanwords approaches? (c) a properly
Ockhamist treatment of IE roots (:=))?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping