Re: Stacking up on standard works

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:

>
> No one ever said Trask was infallible, least of all him.

Then why'd you say: He was a scholar who never made a pronouncement that he couldn't back up 100%.

I guess there's a distinction between being infallible and never saying anything w/o evidence, but that's what I tried to show was wrong.

>

I disagreed with him over what I saw as loanwords to and from Celtic and possibly the ancestor of Lusitanian (some non-Celtic IE language). But he held out for the best possible evidence.

>

The best ev. shows the opposite of what he said for my examples. The rejection of *agriny/agrany- makes no sense, no matter why he did it. What are you trying to prove? All I wanted to show was that he did at least some things wrong, so no belief he had about Basque is proven just because he thought it.

>

If those of you who slight Trask or have never read him did the same, you'd enjoy the respect of everyone on the list.

>

No one has ever done really good work on Proto-Basque, or almost any proto-language, but me.