Re: Paleo-eskimo were building boats in Greenland 4000 years ago.

From: Floyd L. Davidson (floyd_at_barrow.com)
Date: 07/28/04 

Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:42:34 -0800

Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote:
>This *** respectfully submits that, from the cloud of arguments
>that Floyd has put up he still doesn't understand what I have been
>talking about. The best example is Floyd citing
>http://www.uaf.edu/anlc/inuitoreskimo.html which actually confirms
>what I have been saying all along. " "Inuit" refers only to the
>Inupiat of northern Alaska, the Inuit of Canada, and the Kalaallit of
>Greenland", none of which were present in Greenland 4000 years ago.
>>
>>Its just a waste of bandwidth.
>>

Well, you've proved that it is a waste of bandwith!

The point was, and it is well taken, that Larry Kaplan feels
obliged to explain why the linguists at the Alaska Native
Language Center use what to many people is simply the *wrong*
definition of "Inuit".

He does provide the definition that they use, and you have
quoted it above. The point however is that he does *not* say
the other people use a wrong definition and he *clearly* accepts
that it does exist, otherwise he would not have felt obliged to
post that explanation of his usage.

The only one denying two definitions that are both correct is
*you*. I normally (being Alaskan and what having a Yup'ik
family) use the exact same definition that Kaplan describes.
But like Kaplan there is no way that I'm going to say someone
else is wrong when they use Inuit to describe all Eskimos,
modern or ancient. But you, of course, are indeed doing exactly
that... 

-- 
FloydL. Davidson           <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)                         floyd@barrow.com
Quantcast