From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 56025
Date: 2008-03-27
----- Original Message -----
From: tgpedersen
>
> > ==========
>
> Linguistics is not about "I don't think". Its about science.
> Parallells and analogies:
> In Finnish the stem has some of the following meanings: myö-tä
> is 'with'. myö-tä-tuuli is 'wind from behind' and myö-hemmin
> is 'later'.
> ==========
> ok
> It's the usual theorem "Finnish ueber alles"
> "It's true in Finnish, hence it's true for all PU".
>
> I disagree...
> Arnaud
You're implying that Jouppe is a German nationalist and therefore
you're right? It's true in Estonian too. It's true in PIE too, for
that matter, the *xant- root is a noun in Hittite and a
pre-/postposition/preverb in a case form elsewhere in IE.
Torsten
============
I suppose my assessment of PIE and PU
is no surprise.
I have already stated that I think PIE studies
have a strong central-PIE bias,
whereby supposedly PIE reconstructions are
often pre-central-PIE reconstructions.
The worst example of that bias is probably
M. Carrasquer Vidal's theory of Pre-PIE vowels.
A central PIE innovation projected in the past
of PIE common stage !! Wow.
As regards PU, the situation is worse than with PIE
because standard uralicists work *without*
any methodology and Finnish look-alike
reconstructoids are held to be PU proto-forms.
My wording taken from the German Hymn
describes my judgment about Finnish reconstructoids
People obsessed with autochthony at all costs
(we got some dark-siders from India)
are suspect, I want
N--ot
S--o
D--ark
A
P--roto-Uralic
This is my point of view.
Arnaud
===========