Re: Who's Kretschmer? (was 'ez" suffix in Spanish last names)

From: Angantyr (angantyr_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 11/18/04 

Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:43:05 -0500

"Joseph W. Murphy" <jwmurphy700@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:5a1nd.4007$pK6.971@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>> grapheus said:
>
>> As for my remark about the "modern concept" of "Proto-IE" being a
>> mirage; it has been DISTORTED by J. Murphy : I wrote it is what I
>> think that P. Kretschmer would have thought. But he died too early, of
>> course, to say it !...
>>
>> grapheus
>
>
> And Joe Murphy responds:
>
> Where's the DISTORTION? All I did was ask a question based on what you
> said:
>
> You said:
>
> "Paul Kretschmer didn't talk about 'para-IE', but called these languages
> 'proto-IE'...
> A word that 'non-Kretschmerian' linguists of to-day do not like, because,
> for
> them, the word 'Proto-IE' is designating something else, that P.Kretschmer
> would call
> 'a mirage' if he were still alive..."
>
> And, trying to figure out what you meant, I asked:
>
> "So Kretschmer thought that the reconstructed 'proto-Indo-European'
> language
> of the other historical linguists was a 'mirage', something that didn't
> really exist?
>
> Where's the distortion? There's no distortion. I'm simply trying to
> understand
> what you meant by "a mirage".
>
> Please explain what you mean.
>
> While you're at it, are you saying, as well, that Etruscan is an
> Indo-European language?
> If so, why?
>
> In this regard, see:
>
> Agantyr: "Of course, Kretschmer was wrong in considering Etruscan
> proto-Indo-European."
>
> grapheus: "So says the great linguist Angantyr !. Amen."
>
> Joe Murphy
> Boy Linguist
>
I believe the nutty answer to this that you will receive is that Etruscan is
a Proto-Indo-European language in the "Kretschmerian sense", but not in the
sense that other people think of when they talk about Proto-Indo-European,
which is a mirage.

Quantcast