From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 22
Date: 2002-12-08
> >http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze33gpz/sumer-faq.htmlIt's OK as long as you ignore "The Proto-Sumerian language invention
>
> That page contains no information whatsoever on the Sumerian language.
> *** This link should be better: http://www.sumerian.org/sumerian.htm
> Having information on a language (even from Google) is not equivalentGreenberg was a serious linguist, so he knew that neither Sumerian nor
> 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.
> >4) Thus, rather than a proto-World you wish to compile a NostraticNeither Basque nor Sumerian are Indo-European, so they are completely
> >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?
> >5) If languages are fluid with each valley of the world containing aThat's not a question to ask a linguist, unless you want the standard
> >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?