Re: Kuhn's ar-/ur-language

--- On Tue, 2/10/09, Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arnaud@...> wrote:

> From: Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arnaud@...>
> Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Kuhn's ar-/ur-language
> To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, February 10, 2009, 4:48 PM
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick McCallister"
> <gabaroo6958@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 10:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Kuhn's ar-/ur-language
>
>
> >
> > Fellow cornuti:
> >
> > We really don't need to start WWIII over whether
> mi:lvuus has short or
> > long /i/, do we?
> > And what are the consequences if it does or not?
> >
> ===========
> There's no "whether"
> as we know for sure that the word is attested with both a
> short and a long
> i(:) depending on the author.
> But the real issue is we have people in that field who
> cannot even read.
> Pathetic.
>
> A.

And is that a reason to insult someone? I don't think so.