Re: Re[8]: [tied] Re: dhuga:ter

From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 55659
Date: 2008-03-22

----- Original Message -----
From: Brian M. Scott

> The issue was :
> Did Miguel actually read Martinet
> as he claimed he did ?

> I consider that "I wouldn't be surprised"
> is itself a clear indication He did not.

And you're wrong, because he was talking about _something_
_that_Martinet_did_not_write_about_.

One more time: the thought process by which one arrives at a
hypothesis can be *very* different from the way one presents
that hypothesis for public consumption. Miguel was talking
about the former; what's in Martinet's published works is
evidence only of the latter.

Brian

============

One more time : I disagree with your thought processes
and your public conclusions.
What you are saying about Martinet
is complete speculation.

Arnaud

================