Newsgroups: sci.lang,soc.culture.esperanto
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!newshost.marcam.com!insosf1.infonet.net!internet.spss.com!markrose
From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Subject: Re: One point against Esperanto
Message-ID: <D5K6yr.DnA@spss.com>
Sender: news@spss.com
Organization: SPSS Inc
References: <794976261snz@storcomp.demon.co.uk> <HINSENK.95Mar15152124@cyclone.ere.umontreal.ca> <D5IGB4.2BE@spss.com> <HINSENK.95Mar16115936@cyclone.ere.umontreal.ca>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 00:35:14 GMT
Lines: 20

In article <HINSENK.95Mar16115936@cyclone.ere.umontreal.ca>,
Hinsen Konrad <hinsenk@cyclone.ERE.UMontreal.CA> wrote:
>In article <D5IGB4.2BE@spss.com> markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder) writes:
>[Konrad:]
>   >But the only language I know that has this funny mixture is English.
>
>   So get to know more languages.  Quechua and Turkish, for instance,
>   share this feature with English.
>
>OK, so there are at least three. Still I would call it something rare. 

And on what possible basis do you conclude that?  You are given three
examples from three widely different language families; did it occur to
you that just possibly other languages from those same families, or from
other families you don't happen to know, might share the same feature?

>Again, why should this feature be considered important?

Who knows?  I am objecting only to considering it *un*important based
on considering a handful of European languages.
