On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 16:42:10 -0800, "Gerry Reinhart-Waller"
<waluk@...> wrote:

> >http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze33gpz/sumer-faq.html
>
> That page contains no information whatsoever on the Sumerian language.
> *** This link should be better: http://www.sumerian.org/sumerian.htm

It's OK as long as you ignore "The Proto-Sumerian language invention
process", where John claims not that the Sumerians invented writing
(which is true), but that they invented speaking (which is silly).
It's no substitute for learning Sumerian properly, which is a very
difficult and very time-consuming process. For a linguistic
introduction to Sumerian, Marie-Louise Thomsens' "The Sumerian
Language" (Copenhagen, 1984) is indispensable. But reading Thomsen's
book still doesn't make one a Sumerologist.

> Having information on a language (even from Google) is not equivalent
> to putting it in Nostratic (or Eurasiatic). Greenberg likely did
> consider Sumerian, but found no evidence for linking it to Eurasiatic.
> Or decided the Sumerian evidence was too insecure and too difficult
> (as it is) to do anything with it.
>
> *** Or another possibility is that he dinged Sumerian because he was
> a supporter of Semitic as the first language.

Greenberg was a serious linguist, so he knew that neither Sumerian nor
Semitic comes even remotely close to being "the first language".
Whatever that means. Greenberg considers Afro-Asiatic, Kartvelian and
Dravidian (amongst others) not to be part of Eurasiatic, although
probably related to Eurasiatic on a higher level.

> >4) Thus, rather than a proto-World you wish to compile a Nostratic
> >list which includes Indo-European. Am I correct in assuming that I/E
> >has been completely compiled?
>
> No.
>
> *** Now that's a good answer. Are you referring to Basque?
> What other aspects of Indo-European continue being unresolved?
> Sumerian? Are there many others?

Neither Basque nor Sumerian are Indo-European, so they are completely
irrelevant to the question. Not that I understand the question. What
is "compiled" supposed to mean? Many many aspects of the
Proto-Indo-European language remain unresolved or debated.

> >5) If languages are fluid with each valley of the world containing a
> >separate dialect, how can any scholar determine whether a particular
> >language such as Basque is a true language (thereby an ethnic group)
> >or not?
>
> True language? Thereby an ethnic group? What does that mean?
>
> Basque is a language. It is not an ethnic group.
>
> *** Perhaps my question should have been, how does one separate a language from a dialect?

That's not a question to ask a linguist, unless you want the standard
reply: A language is a dialect with an army and a navy.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...