Re: Re[5]: [tied] Re: dhuga:ter

Arnaud,

we are not in Communist China, where one must read Mao;

nor in Saudi Arabia, where one must read the Qur'ân.

We are all aware that you honor Martinet but

reading him or not is not the key to eternal salvation.

Whether Miguel and Brian have or have not read Martinet in the original

is of no great importance one way or another.

Both of them have read many more books at this point in time than you have,
and

more importantly have trained their minds to be logical and disciplined.

Instead of lecturing them (a waste of time). you could be learning from
them.


Patrick

----- Original Message -----
From: "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 2:24 AM
Subject: Re: Re[5]: [tied] Re: dhuga:ter


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Brian M. Scott
>
>
> >>>> I wouldn't be surprised if it was precisely senex ~
> >>>> senem what led Martinet to look into the matter of
> >>>> laryngeal hardening in the first place.
>
> >>>> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
>
> >> You are supposed to be
> >> a reliable serious IE expert.
> >> You claim you read Martinet
> >> and you wrote "I wouldn't be surprised..."
>
> >> I have to contradict you once again,
> >> No, this is not true,
> >> it's obvious you did not read him,
>
> > I doubt it. Can you quote a passage in which Martinet
> > explains what led him to investigate laryngeal hardening?
> > If not, then Miguel's 'I wouldn't be surprised' comment
> > says absolutely nothing about whether he's read Martinet
> > or not.
>
> > Martinet, 1975, Evolution des langues et reconstruction,
> > PUF, Paris.
>
> > P148
>
> > "les formes indo-européennes en -a:k
> > et leurs thématisations en -a:ko- paraissent
> > désigner surtout des êtres masculins,
> > on est amené à penser que -k- est apparu
> > dans des contextes particuliers aux masculins.
> > Ceci évoque les masculins en -a:- du grec,
> > avec leur -s# de nominatif singulier,
> > s'opposant aux féminins sans -s#.
> > Ce serait donc devant la désinence -s
> > du nominatif singulier que H2,
> > phonétiquement quelque fricative dorso-vélaire,
> > se serait durci en -k- alors qu'il tendait
> > à s'affaiblir partout ailleurs."
>
> Which says absolutely nothing relevant. You are still
> failing to distinguish (1) exposition of a hypothesis from
> (2) the train of thought that led to the hypothesis in the
> first place. As those of us who have published academic
> papers know, they are usually very different.
>
> Brian
>
> =========
> Dear Brian,
>
> I understand that nobody likes
> to be caught "wrong".
>
> If you had ever read Martinet,
> (I discovered you did not)
> and if Miguel ever had read him,
> (I maintain he obviously did not)
> you would know that Martinet
> tends to have pet ideas :
> One of them is
> the idea that H2-s > -k-s
> in some cases like Masc -H2-s
> becoming -k-s accounting
> for adjectives -a(:)k-s
> Martinet has repeatedly stated
> that again and again.
>
> If you have read Martinet
> you don't write
> "I wouldn't be surprised"
>
> It like saying
> I read Shakespeare, *of course*
> I wouldn't be surprised
> it was written in English.
>
> No comments.
>
> Last but not least,
>
> Could you please discard
> once and for all
> your condescending tone
> when you talk to me ?
>
> You have been proved weak
> you lack having read Martinet.
> So read him
> instead of trying to belittle
> somebody else.
>
> Arnaud
>
> ===============
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>