2012/4/30, Tavi <
oalexandre@...>:
> Pretending everything must be inherited from "PIE" instead of borrowed
> is more an obsession than a true scientific approach.
Bhrihskwobhloukstroy:
I've always said "can". The only one who uses "must" is Ocatvià
Alexandre, do You know him?
He pretends that, among all theoretical possibilities, only those
he likes are correct. He has a real obsession against PIE
>
>> Every assumption must be unwarranted, otherwise we wouldn't need
>> models. Your assumption (presence of language replacements) is equally
>> unwarranted
>>
Tavi:
> Not really, because we've got the evidence in the form of toponymy and
> substrate loanwords.
Bhrihskwobhloukstroy:
Your evidence is made of Your etymologies. That isn't evidence,
it's - correctly - an amount of working hypotheses.
Tavi:
>
> Even if each individual lexemal were in fact inherited
> from "PIE", the compound is English (or Germanic at best), not PIE.
Bhrihskwobhloukstroy:
Not at all, because its compositional rules are PIE as well as its
lexical members. It appears that You have serious difficulties in
operating with the notion of linguistic system. I suggest You to get a
bit deeper into such simple general concepts as system, norm, and
usage, because You don't seem to be able to make a distinction between
them. It's a matter a metalanguage, otherwise we waste our time
Tavi:
> BTW, the word land is a Celtic loanword into Germanic.
>
Bhrihskwobhloukstroy:
I know quite well this hypothesis. Are You able to repeat publicly
its argument?
Let me observe that while many people tell You that You're are
wrong and insult You, now that You have found a person who says 'You
may be right' You attack him (me) many times a day. You assert that my
ideas are wrong, while I've always just pointed out that my model is
potentially valid no less than Yours. You keep on attacking one of the
few friends You have. You seem to look for fight insted of discussion