Re: On the knowledge of the reaserched languages
- From: holman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Eugene Holman)
- Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 04:45:02 +0300
In article <gtwtn6opi5.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Otto-Ville.Ronkainen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (O-V R:nen) wrote:
> holman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Eugene Holman) writes:
>
> > Hungarian is *not* closely related to Finnish and no responsible linguist
> > would make such a claim. Hungarian is a *distantly related* language to
> > Finnish, something that is obvious to anyone willing to use established
> > methodologies to do the work of attesting for him/herself.
>
> I suppose it comes from that the language closest related to Finnish
> is Estonian,
Check out Karelian:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/4280/kar_zapiska.html
> and then there are, crudely speaking, a dozen or two of
> languages no one has ever heard about,
It depends upon who you are. The Mordvins (Erzyas and Mokshas), one
million strong, are the fourth largest Finno-Ugric-speaking ethnos.
> and then there is Hungarian,
> which sort of gives one the idea of a "closely" related language.
> On the other hand, if one moves the same number of closest related
> modern languages (rather than millennia to common ancestor) from any
> IE language, one doesn't normally end up all that far away.
English and Irish? English and Polish? English and Albanian? English and Pashto?
Revisionism is in order.
Regards,
Eugene Holman
.
- References:
- Re: On the knowledge of the reaserched languages
- From: O-V R:nen
- Re: On the knowledge of the reaserched languages
- Prev by Date: Re: Sob, it's true about uvular R
- Next by Date: Re: Pinyin question
- Previous by thread: Re: On the knowledge of the reaserched languages
- Next by thread: Re: On the knowledge of the reaserched languages
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|