Konu: Re: [historical_linguistics] Digest Number 31
Re Edo Nyland
I have examined Nyland's material and I
know of other linguists who have done so. We are agreed that the
linguistic and historical evidence in support of his view is quite
inadequate, and indeed that that if one proceeds as he does this is
virtually certain to be the case: on such a basis it is not difficult to
'discover' etymologies of the kind that one prefers, as the work of Polat
Kaya, John White and others also shows. We would also regard the
historical scenario which Nyland envisages - rather like the one envisaged
by Polat Kaya - as implausible. I do not doubt his sincerity, and he
does know more about historical linguistics than most such authors; but he
adopts some strange interpretations of mainstream opinions, and his own
claims will not be accepted on the basis of what he has written so
far. I was unable to access the sites referred to, but I would be
interested (albeit surprised) to see a positive review of Nyland's work by
anyone skilled in linguistics. (But it is helpful and welcome that he
acknowledges here that his ideas are rejected by most scholars, while
attributing this rejection - in my view quite wrongly - to unworthy
motives.)