From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 56114
Date: 2008-03-28
----- Original Message -----
From: jouppe
>
> > =========
> > the issue is more that Jouppe should explain how
> > kud, kwa, kë, kwala
> > derive from *kud reconstructoid.
> >
> > Arnaud
> > =============
>
> =========
> We're not discussing general truths.
> and French even less.
>
> The questions are :
>
> Why did Permic lose the final consonant
> when it did not in some other words
> of the same language ?
>
> Why should -d- become -l-
> when it did not in some other words
> of the same language ?
>
> Why should u become wa
> when it did not in some other words
> of the same language ?
>
> This is where the issue is.
>
> You little shameless cheater !
>
> Arnaud
>
> ==================
>
This question abaut Permic is a good case to illustrate one
fundamental problem with this noahistic superfamily-endevour. In
order to master just one language family you need an enormous amount
of knowledge of conditioning and morphophonemics etc in different
daughter languages. I don't have that knowledge for Permic and Arnaud
has demonstrated repeatedly that he does not have it in uralistics on
any level. He just rambles around in the data. I was disappointed
that even for Moksha, which I thought was your strength Arnaud, you
would not even recognize the suffixes to follow me- < *mün,ä-. Have I
pretended to know Permic or launched innovative theories for
understanding it? Is it reasonable to call me cheater?
Jouppe
==========
Mr. Schalin,
You have positioned yourself as the main advocate
of current Uralistics,
You have repeatedly explained what it's about, etc
We are now discussing one particular word,
and I have requested that you explain
its phonetic behavior
according to your current Uralistic theory.
Instead of explaining your case,
you are now indulging in some big pronouncements
that ultimately amount to air bubbles
and personal "états d'âme".
You have invented Moksha words.
And up to now, you have repeatedly avoided
the issue of explain why Moksha does not fit in your
Finnishoid reconstructoids
which I hold for junk.
Such as süksi becoming sjoksja.
You have also failed to explain why
your finnishoid reconstructoids should be preferred
to the items in UEW,
which I hold for inadequate
but better than some of your finnishoid junk.
In that case, üli is worse than wilä
Any time you are requested to really enter
into the issue and look at the real data,
you jump out of the question
and start philosophizing about issues
grossly and obviously irrelevant
Does it take so much to understand
what a cheater is ?
================
I would also remind you that Sammallahti, one of the main refiners of
the mainstream reconstruction of Proto-Uralic, also has excelled in
reconstructing Proto-Permic, which is found in his article in Sinor,
Denis (red.) Handbuch der Orientalistik. Abt. 8, Handbook of Uralic
studies, Vol. 1, The Uralic languages : description, history and
foreign influences (1988) Leiden: E.J. Brill. ISBN 90-04-07741-3.
===========
I know this book.
I have read many parts of it.
It's basically below average,
It's hardly worth the paper
it's written on.
Abondolo (Ed) is worse but it's no excuse
for Sinor (Ed) being bad.
Arnaud
==============
As for Proto-Uralic, if you want to change the reconstructions, the
family external comparisons severly damages the credibility of your
argument. The method becomes finalistic and will inevitably distort
the interpretation.
=============
We don't need to step out of Uralic data
to see that current reconstructoids are junk.
but
it does help to look at the rest of the world
to determine what improvements are possible.
Arnaud
===========
Why is it by the way that I don't see any references to Proto-Semitic
on cybalist. This is in contrast to the great number of anachronistic
comparisons between PIE and Arabic, PIE and Hebrew, which I also find
in Arnouds article. Is this "not a valid node" either nwadays? For
the finalité of accomodating Proto-World?
Jouppe
===========
NSDAP once again ?
I'm afraid Cybalist is open-minded
and you are bound to fail
if you want to silence facts
which you don't like to hear.
I am increasingly convinced
that you are not somebody
I 'd like to meet.
Arnaud
===============