First off, it's hard to discuss anything seriously when you
only offer the following:

1) ProtoEskimo *-nka < *-t-m-ka
(Can I buy a vowel, Vanna?)

2) IE *penkWe < *kemtkWe
(I guess *k kinda sounds a little *p... yeah, right!)

3) Aleut t`in < *tkin based on AfroAsiatic ???
(Note: /ti-/ is _known_ to mean "here" as in
/ti-N/ "I am here". There is no underlying *****tin-)

4) Direct Semitic-IE comparisons
(as if Hindi-English comparisons aren't daring enough)

5) Comparisons of _entire_ linguistic systems (such
as conjugational paradigms, declensional
systems, vowel systems, phonology, etc) are
completely ignored in favour of loose and patently
false connections strewn about here and there.
No linguist even worth a grain of salt can respect
that irrational methodology.

It seems that every language you handle turns into a tongue-tying
Klallam look-alike. All that can be said is that the above
nonsense, along with your mass-comparison derived views of
Nostratic, is all just armchair-linguist crap.

Now for the less annoying remainder of your post:

1. In IndoTyrrhenian, the *-i plural is used residually
for pronouns and numerals (IE *wei- "we", *trei- "three",
dwix "two", etc). The idea of a constructus and absolutus
plural might be worthy of thought but then, how does
it connect with the alternation in the third person
that you mention in plural object possessives?

2. Back up your unsubstantiated assertion that
Nenets /-v/ < *-m with real examples. It's funny but I
just don't recall there being an accusative in */-v/
(Nb: Uralic *-m).

3. Given that we still have a lingering unexplained Nenets
/-v/, claiming that Hungarian /-k/ < *-k is empty-headed.
Rather, it's far more likely that it derives from
*-G (a uvular). This phoneme can become both *-w and
*-k and yet is also derivable from earlier *-ux seen in
IndoTyrrhenian (1ps transitive stative *-x-� > IE *-xa).

4. Since Hungarian also has /-l/ beside /-t/ and Nenets
(no matter how much you plead) similarly has a seperate
suffix /-n/ distinct in form and function from /-d/, a
seperate 2ps suffix *-n is ENTIRELY UNDENIABLE, further
supported by its presence in CKam, EskAleut AND
IndoTyrrhenian! Your insane sound rules simply don't make
this fact go away.

5. External evidence even further underlines the presence of
a distinct set of pronominal endings. Dravidian *yan- "I"
and *nin- "you" are thus finally EXPLAINABLE within the
Nostratic context, since they are relatable to the
intransitive Steppe suffixes *-ux and *-un, and all derived
from the Eurasiatic absolutive pronouns *u and *nu (distinct
from ergative *mu and *tu). Elamite also has 1ps /-x/
and 1ps.poss /-k/. Kartvelian has *w- (1ps.subj), yet again
seperate in form and function from *m- (1ps.obj). There
is no AA **-k however.

6. By analysing all this in terms of _systems_, as opposed to
just noting random similarities as per your method, we
see that a suppletive set of pronouns, distinguishing
between absolutive (*u, *nu) and ergative (*nu, *tu) are
postfixed to the verb in Late Eurasiatic (Eurasiatic
without Sumerian) when it shifts from ergativity to
accusativity, forming an intransitive-transitive
system (*-xu/*-nu). Steppe inheirits this system
(*-ux, *-un) and it becomes a subjective-objective system
in Boreal. In IndoTyrrhenian, emphasis shifts from the
transitivity of the verb to the state of the verb and
thus, the "intransitive" endings are optionally given the
an object marker *�, making them transitive and
free to convey the stative (1ps *-x-�, 2ps *-t-�, 3ps *-�).
Systems, Miguel, SYSTEMS! Analyse the SYSTEMS! Anything
else is pure junk.

7. Even Bomhard admits and is sympathetic to the fact that
Greenberg had been contemplating a 2ps *nV pronoun to explain
all this, further showing that this isn't just my
own dismissable reasoning. Of course, your twisted views of
linguistics ARE indeed your own.

Everything, and I mean everything, is against your line of
reasoning, Miguel! What on earth are you ranting about?
What you say never makes logical sense. Each view that you
espouse seems almost cleverly chosen, always the least supported viewpoint
possible. These views are then combined to form a
frightful mosaic of overall nonsense that no one could ever

- love gLeN

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp