Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!kimbark!deb5
From: deb5@kimbark.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff)
Subject: Re: The whole language tree thing.
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: midway.uchicago.edu
Message-ID: <DFnAzM.EG5@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Reply-To: deb5@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: The University of Chicago
References: <DEIxrB.8J0@crash.cts.com> <AC8B88F49668421EB@yarn.demon.co.uk> <DFHy0A.2zE@midway.uchicago.edu> <AC90D27896688382@yarn.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 1995 02:30:57 GMT
Lines: 88

In article <AC90D27896688382@yarn.demon.co.uk>,
Paul Talacko <taka@yarn.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <DFHy0A.2zE@midway.uchicago.edu>,
>deb5@woodlawn.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff) wrote:

>>This is a good point:  footnoting some of your work would help validate
>>it.  You're certainly not the first person to challenge the genetic model.
>
>This may have escaped your brilliant mind, but this is in fact a usenet
>discussion not a doctoral seminar.  It is an informal place to throw around
>ideas.  I certainly do not intend to footnote anything here, nor do I even
>make the claim that it has been properly researched.

True, a Usenet newsgroup is an informal place for spouting ideas, but it
is also a venue for serious discussions of linguistics.  I made the mistake
of thinking you were treating it as the latter when you were, in fact,
treating it as the former.

>>>Deconstrucing the dominant paradigm, maybe.
>>
>>Maybe.  But what good is it to deconstruct a paradigm and then not erect
>>anything to take its place?
>
>I take it this is rhetorical question and therefore is not intended to be
>answered.

It was not intended as a rhetorical question.

>>>Look at it this way, to classify anyone's race is  stupid, the average
>>>German, if there be such a thing and I doubt that a lot, is a mixture of
>>>what? Celtic, Slavic, Germanic, Gypsy, Roman, Dalmation, Illyrian, Turkish?
>>> Of course you cannot unravel the genes to find the pure race, so neither
>>>can you unravel a language, at least not a proper living one.
>>
>>This is a completely irrevelant tangent.  Obviously, traits from these
>
>It's called arguing be analogy.
>
Arguing by *irrelevant* analogy.  By associating I-E reconstruction with
bogus racial science, you are only following one of cardinal rules of 
Usenet flaming:  if you can make the other guy look like a racist, you win.

>>It makes perfect sense to try to "separate the strands"
>>and try to discover which features ones originated among which groups of 
>>speakers.  (I'll leave it for population biologists to speculate on the 
>
>To try to seperate strands is one thing, but to try to have sleepless
>nights over whether something is classified as a cent or satem language
>seems completely pointless and, in fact, is.

And has been for decades.  What's the most recent work you've read in
historical linguistics if you think this is what its practicioners waste
their time with?

>>Maybe you need to go back to your earlier posts and clarify some of your
>>claims.
>OOA
>Maybe, but a) I can't because they have all been purged from my computer,
>b) I reserve the right to disclaim or vary anything typed late at night
>with a cup of Lavazza espresso by my keyboard, and c) I can't remember what
>I typed.

Well then, I reserve the right not to give credence to anything you
say on any topic.  If you're not willing to stand by something you write, 
why bother posting it at all?

>>>Certain languages fall into it: English, Swedish, Norwegian and Danish,
>>>French, Italian and Spanish.  On the factors I have deliniated, I would
>>>argue that German also falls into the group. Slavonic languages do not
>>>because they are too inflected.
>>
>>Ah, yes, the heavily-inflected Slavonic languages.  Like Bulgarian.
>
>As I typed that I was wondering which drongo would try to make a point with
>Bulgarian and try to refute the general by using references to the
>specific.  Come on down Mr. von Brighoff.

If you knew this, why didn't you prevent it?  Just typing "most Slavonic
languages" would have made my cheap shot impossible.

Now that this exchange has left the realm of linguistics entirely and
degenerated into personal wrangling, please follow up to email if you
wish to carry it any further.

-- 
	 Daniel "Da" von Brighoff    /\          Dilettanten
	(deb5@midway.uchicago.edu)  /__\         erhebt Euch
				   /____\      gegen die Kunst!
