Re: Question re. Copper artifact CanadianArcticformerRe:CopperCasting In America (Trevelyan)
From: Floyd L. Davidson (floyd_at_barrow.com)
Date: 07/18/04
- Next message: Philip Deitiker: "New "I" Catagory List, Name Confusion"
- Previous message: Floyd L. Davidson: "Re: Question re. Copper artifact Canadian Arctic formerRe:CopperCasting In America (Trevelyan)"
- In reply to: Seppo Renfors: "Re: Question re. Copper artifact CanadianArcticformerRe:CopperCasting In America (Trevelyan)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 07:14:05 -0800
Seppo Renfors <Renfors@not.com.au> wrote:
>"Floyd L. Davidson" wrote:
>> Seppo Renfors <Renfors@not.com.au> wrote:
>> >"Floyd L. Davidson" wrote:
>> >> In fact, a great deal of salvage soon becomes trade items.
>> >
>> >Wrong again. While salvaged good can be and probably are traded
>> >internally within a particular people, they do NOT become "trade
>> >goods" no matter what.
>>
>> Nothing you have to say following a premise as dumb as that one
>> is worth listening to.
>>
>> Of course then you follow it up with what has to be the most
>> abjectly *stupid* statement you've made yet:
>>
>> >Further to that INTERNAL trade between
>> >individuals of the same people, eg Thule people, isn't considered
>> >"trade" when discussing trade between different ethnic groups and
>> >cultures.
>>
>> Trade between Inuit people isn't trade. Hmmm...
>
>When the discussion is about trade between two GROUPS of people - the
>Norse and as per your claim, Inuits - then your erroneous suggestion
>that salvage traded internally in ONE GROUP - ie the Inuit, amounts to
>the salvage being "trade goods", then you clearly don't have the
>ability to follow the discussion. It cannot refer to "trade goods" as
>it is the group dealing with itself! In that sense there is no trade
>as it is the same entity - I suppose you find that far to hard to
>grasp.
Whine all you like. The Eskimos had trade goods, trade routes, and
even trade fairs, long before the Norse ever showed up. Sometimes
the trade might be one family to another, sometimes one village to
another, and some of those non-trade items were traded to people
a thousand miles distant.
Trust me on this Seppo, trade between Inuit people is still "trade".
And stop being so Eurocentric, it stinks.
>The alternative is you are playing really DUMB in order to evade
>having to deal with other issues you know nothing about..... *shrug*
>your problem! Deal with it - go have language lessons, and skill
>development in comprehension.
You might try learning something about communications. At the
top of the list would be realizing that when you post these
massive projections of yourself into every article, nobody
misses the fact.
-- FloydL. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com
- Next message: Philip Deitiker: "New "I" Catagory List, Name Confusion"
- Previous message: Floyd L. Davidson: "Re: Question re. Copper artifact Canadian Arctic formerRe:CopperCasting In America (Trevelyan)"
- In reply to: Seppo Renfors: "Re: Question re. Copper artifact CanadianArcticformerRe:CopperCasting In America (Trevelyan)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|