From: Rick McCallister
Message: 61686
Date: 2008-11-16
> From: Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arnaud@...>Aryan, as a term, preceded Nazism's noxious use of the term. Hamitic is based on a racist concept --a group cursed by God. It also presuuposes a dichotomoy between Semitic and the rest of the family which is not there. It is an untenable term --like called Romance "Latino-Grenouille",
> Subject: Re: External links (Was Re: [tied] Re: oldest places- and watername in Scandinavia)
> To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, November 16, 2008, 4:34 PM
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick McCallister"
> <gabaroo6958@...>
> >
>
> >
> > I will just briefly say that I prefer the
> "old"
> > word Chamito-Semitic (CS),
> > because my opinion about the word Afrasian or
> Afro-asiatic
> > is that this word
> > was invented by Greenberg to sell the myth that the
> > perimeter of CS was
> > known once and for good.
> > This word is basically a marketing operation by
> Greenberg
> > mixed with some
> > kind of scientific putschism that previous works
> amount to
> > nothing.
> > I don't want to give any credentials to that myth
> which
> > is part of the
> > problem we now have in general when dealing with
> > macro-comparative issues.
> >
> =========
>
> I appreciate your review of Ehret. If it's like you say
> it is, it's garbage.
> Please use the currently accepted designations Afro-Asiatic
> or Afrasian.
> Hamito-Semitic et al. is not scientific and smacks of
> racism. There is no
> Hamitic branch and the term Hamitic is rooted in
> pseudo-scientific racist
> dogma that originally tried to find justification in the
> Bible by tainting
> Africans as accursed "sons of Ham". Even if it is
> the most common form used
> in France, correct people.
>
> ========
>
> I'm sorry,
> but I won't use the "currently accepted
> designation" in the _USA_.
> As I have explained,
> That term : Afro-Asiatic or Afrasian is just American
> putchism and a
> marketing operation by Greenberg.
> As a matter of fact, most works on AA coming from your side
> of the Atlantic
> are not worth that much.
>
> The traditional name in French
> "Chamito-Semitique" does not convey any
> racist undertones at all.
> It's a perfectly acceptable scientific word, for two
> centuries now, I guess,
> It's the standard word.
> I have written a couple of articles, soon due, and nobody
> here asked me to
> change CS to something else.
> I noticed Russian people often use the traditional term HS
> as well.
> Fortunately, we have very few Bible-obsessed people here in
> France, if any,
>
> In other words,
> It is somehow a matter of principle,
> As I reject the words Afro-Asiatic or Afrasian, the
> underlying American
> putchism and most works done by people who use these words,
> most of them I consider mildy incompetent to outrageously
> incompetent.
> In other words, I have no particular reason to subdue to
> arrogant BS
> sellers.
> I find it useful to have another word, I mean Afro-Asiatic
> or Afrasian, to
> stigmatize what I reject,
> and keep a clean word for what I consider valid
> Chamito-Semitique.
> This is more the way I would use Afro-Asiatic or Afrasian,
> if necessary.
> Somehow in the same way as Aryan is an unpalatable synonym
> of Indo-European.
> I believe we need to keep the traditional word,
> because sooner or later, we will need it to discard the
> myth Greenberg gave
> the perimeter of that family.
> I consider Afro-Asiatic or Afrasian words to be completely
> "rotten".
>
> Hope you understand my point of view.
>
> Arnaud