From: tgpedersen
Message: 62579
Date: 2009-01-22
>Now I face a tough choice: who should I believe? You or UEW?
>
> >> I really wonder what you want to show with that kind of long list
> >> of words with no analysis and no coherence,
> >
> > In the kant-/katt-/kunt- etc list the internal connections are two
> >
> > 1) a semantic development from words having to do with hunting
> > storage hut, side of the river, harbor building, to community,
> > 'Hundertschaft', ie an administrative division; a development
> > from frontier conditions to semi-civilization.
>
> ========
> From your previous mail,
> Norwegian Saami gad'de 'bank' usw. ~ Finnish kanto 'tree stump,
> Estonian kand (Gen. kannu) id., Saami Norwegian Saami guoddo id. In
> SKES the Finnish words kanta and kanto are separated. This seems not
> to be warranted semantically.
>
> It definitely is warranted semantically that these words are to be
> separated.
>
> >> with no support and no data.The authors of UEW will be saddened to hear that.
> >
> > I thought you said there was too much data?
> > > Torsten
> >
> =======
>
> You can paste all the pages of the UEW with words sounding like K_T
> This is not data.
> Do you understand the word "relevant" ?I think I do. Actually, I am applying it right now.