Re: Stacking up on standard works

From: Rick McCallister
Message: 69163
Date: 2012-04-01

Linguistics is not a hard science, like, let's say, physics --therefore it is only semi-predictable at best. There is too much human interaction for it to be predictable. That's why we have so much fun arguing :>

From: Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Stacking up on standard works

 
W dniu 2012-04-01 01:04, Tavi pisze:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> >
> > > When these correspondences form a coherent pattern, i.e. they lead to
> > > predictable results.
> >
> > *Predictable results*? What do you mean by that?
> >
> That something behaves as expected from other experiencies.
>
> http://oald8.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/dictionary/predictable

Thank you, I know the meaning of the adjective "predictable". What
puzzles me is that you think the comparative method should yield
predictable results. If they are predictable, why compare things at all?

Piotr