Jerzy Jakubowski wrote:
> Eric Gill <ericvgill@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns947DABE6018B0ericvgillyahoocom@24.93.43.121>...
>> "Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote in
>> news:bv2jat$382$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl:
[...]
>>> That's why so many scientists have been trying to do
>>> exactly that, with their nostratic, and all that baloney.
>> Funny - I cannot seem to find anything linking Nostratic
>> with hertiable genetic changes in populations.
>> Have you, or is this just another little story you've made
>> up?
>> <snip>
> They've been trying to posit a common ancestor between PIE and
> other families.
> The reason why is that it is totally counterintuitive that
> each language family appeared separately, so a common ancestor
> language must exist, and yet they cannot even design an
> artificial language that would look anything like that. The
> languages are so different it wouldn't work.
What nonsense. It would be straightforward if tedious to
construct a language from which FU and IE, say, could be derived
by linguistically plausible sequences of changes, but since it
would be meaningless, no one would bother.
[...]
Brian
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 |
| 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 |
| 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 |
|