Re: *y-n,W- "subordinate"?

From: Arnaud Fournet
Message: 61760
Date: 2008-11-20

----- Original Message -----
From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
>
> >> >
> >> > That particular loan Piotr admitted the possible existence of a
> >> > long time ago.
> >> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/36633
> >> >
>
> The message reads :

> the formal and semantic match betweem PIE *h2jw- and Semitic *h.yw-
> is striking indeed and may point to ancient borrowing (or to
> Nostratic inheritance, _if_ there are possible matches in other
> families).
> >
======


> The translation of this mail as supporting the hypothesis of a LW
> is a distortion and mis-reading of yours.
> A.

I didn't write 'supports the hypothesis of a loan', but 'admitted the
possible existence of a loan'.
Don't distort and misread what I write.
Torsten

========

The mail speaks about a "striking" "formal and semantic match"
which may be explained as an "ancient borrowing" or an "inheritance".
Piotr did not admit any loan,
He just recognized the existence of a "match".

The hypothesis of a loan is your own interpretation resulting from a
distortion of the original meaning.
The original mail is neutral and thru an erroneous rephrasing you are trying
to make this mail say something different from its original meaning.
You are trying to sell the idea that this word is a loan, when the mail only
speaks about a striking match.
The transformation from match into possible loanword is your own erroneous
interpretation.
And you keep on truncating the part of the mail that contradicts your own
interpretation.

Don't distort and misread what other people write.

A.

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



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links