Re: Armenian, Sumerian, Burushaski, and Turkic languages

On Jun 13, 11:36 pm, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 13, 11:11 pm, Nathan Sanders <nsand...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

No one here has argued any such thing. Languages with only short
words *do* exist (Chinese), so of course it's possible that (some)
older languages consisted solely or primarily of short words.

His majesty Peter T. Daniels told me repeatedly
that a language of short words only did never exist

Shut your lying fucking mouth, you worthless piece of idolatrous ***.

(I don't remember his exact wordings). Whithout
a proof, of course. Word by Him is evidence enough.

You want invective, I can try to give invective.

What is idiotic is your continued assertion that because the language
is "early" (the definition of which seems to change from post to
post), it *must have* only been composed of short words.

Back to invectives, as I know you best.

You take this magical concept of "short words" as the *starting* point
for your analysis, rather than as one of many possible end points.
You artificially limit your analysis to suit your peculiar fantasies,
rather than leaving your options open to the full range of
possibilities that exist in human language.

Very simple tools very simple words. Language mirrors
the level of live, and in humans the level of technology.

Ignoramus.

It may look like invective, but it is simple description.

(An aside to Jim: culture is technology integrated
into life, and this is another insight of mine, very
simple, yet also most complex, as you shall see
when you ponder the consequences.) What do you
mean by "full range" ? Is this the full range as you
know it? are other possibilities excluded? My
experimenting with a language consisting of short
words only, words of one or two or three letters
(letters as phonemes in the old sense) led me
to the insight that inverse forms and further
permutations play a key role.

Then why don't you go play in alt.language.artificial or whatever they
call it, where schemes that don't observe the nature of human language
are welcome?

Permutations make
sense for short words only, that is why they play
only a marginal role in recent languages, but
they would have played a major role in early
language, at least in what I call Magdalenian.

Show us some "permutations" in Chinese or Vietnamese.

I had wonderful teachers who allowed me to
explore my own ways, and encouraged me to
do so. I am very grateful to them, and my
gratefulness grows with every year, as I come
to see that the freedom of reasoning in the
sciences is not at all guaranteed. Academe
lingers on in the feudal past, especially the
humanities. There is no free market of ideas.
The first criterium of the highly praised free
market is free access to the market, and this
is not given in the humanities. They are a
bulwark ruled by professors who compensate
a barren mind by playing power games.
You are still young, I hope you don't petrify
so soon.

Too bad they didn't teach you to respect facts.

.

Loading