Re: Ligurian

At 4:18:39 PM on Monday, April 30, 2012, Tavi wrote:

[...]

> Pretending everything must be inherited from "PIE" instead
> of borrowed is more an obsession than a true scientific
> approach.

Of course no one does that: that's a straw man of your own
invention. It's perfectly true that explanations via
inheritance are preferred, ceteris paribus, to explanations
via borrowing; that's as it should be. A claim that
explanations by borrowing are actually excluded, however, is
either a lie or indicative of ignorance of the field.

In your preference for ill-supported explanations by
long-range borrowing you seem as obsessive as the proponents
of OIT who have occasionally infested the list.

>> new < PIE *newos
>> found < PIE *pntó-
>> land < PIE *lomH-dhh1-om

>> ergo newfoundland < PIE *newo-pntó-lom[H]-dhh1-o-m.
>> This is the notion of linguistic system

> Definitively not. Even if each individual lexemal were in
> fact inherited from "PIE", the compound is English (or
> Germanic at best), not PIE.

Now here, for once, I agree with you. Whether it *could*
have been inherited from PIE, the compound itself, unlike
its elements, clearly is not inherited from PIE.

Brian