From: tgpedersen
Message: 52787
Date: 2008-02-12
>I think it's like this: Kishore thinks linguists are obsequious and
> At 12:53:41 AM on Tuesday, February 12, 2008, kishore
> patnaik wrote:
>
> > Scot,
>
> > Yes, your assumption is right wrt the semantics.
>
> > I repeat I have used the word cognates, knowing fully well
> > the meaning of the word. [...]
>
> Which amounts to saying that you deliberately misused it.
>
> The initial mistake wasn't a big problem; your continued
> defense of it is another matter.
>
> > Your refusal to help me is laughable to say the least.
>
> Actually, I didn't refuse.
>
> > I can not see how discussion of economic meanings of a
> > word has something to do with my basic or otherwise
> > knowledge of linguistics.
>
> It's a matter of basic courtesy. The primary focus of the
> list is (Indo-European) linguistics. What's more, your
> question is a linguistic question. Deliberate refusal to
> learn the most basic linguistic terminology or to use it
> correctly is therefore discourtesy, plain and simple.
>
> (Others may be feeling more generous, which is fine, but I'm
> afraid that my reservoir of good will was seriously depleted
> by that Maya nonsense.)