Re: Stacking up on standard works

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

>
> > Having read his magna opus "The History of Basque", I can say that

while

> > he was a good Vascologist, he was also a poor comparative linguist.
> > Apparently, he had an agenda which not only made him negate any
> > possibilty of genetic relationships between Basque and other

languages

> > (e.g. Iberian), but also he strongly minimized the influence of

Basque

> > in its neighbouring Romance languages, specially Spanish.
>
> Larry Trask also wrote _Historical Linguistics_ (1996, London:

Arnold),

> one of the best and reader-friendliest handbooks in that field of
> studies. Since it discusses, among other things, the application and
> limitations of the comparative method, you could gain a lot from

reading

> it. By calling Trask "a poor comparative linguist" without having
> anything to show as you own credentials you merely show that ignorance
> breeds arrogance.
>

I'm afraid you took my statement out of the context it was made. As
regarding Basque, Trask's position can be summarized in one sentence:
"Basque is an isolate. Period.".

> > I'm afraid the argument of a "very late attestation [in writing]"

means

> > little in a language like Basque, whose written tradition is
> > comparetively recent (the first book is from the 16th century).

Anyway,

> > *mintz* can't be a recent borrowing because it shows nasalization of

the

> > initial labial (no t to mention the variants with *p-*). This would

make

> > it at least a word from the Middle Ages.
>
> Still, it proves nothing about its origin or the direction of

borrowing.

>

Only if you insist on an implausible "Romance" etymology.