Re: Armenian, Sumerian, Burushaski, and Turkic languages

On Jun 19, 4:12 am, Nathan Sanders <nsand...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <1182210517.034058.145...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,

Darkstar <darkstar...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
he didn't even
realize Armenian can be related to two families at the same time.

It can be, but only in a totally trivial and mind-numbingly
uninteresting way, using an ambiguous meaning of "family" that counts
both PIE and Romance as "families", thus allowing a family to also be
a descendent of another family. So Spanish is related to both Romance
and PIE (as well as such groupings as Ibero-Romance and Western
Romance).

However, I assume you were actually intending to make some
non-trivial, interesting claim. If so, your claim is false.

So, are you being boring or wrong?

He's just a liar at best

Provide proof or retract your slander. What have I lied about? I
need to see not only a citation of my supposed lie, but also a
citation showing that my claim was in fact a lie. You'll have to
forgive me if I don't just take your word for it; you've hardly proven
yourself a reliable reference on matters of linguistics.

No one can "prove" any of that. Read Feynmann where he was able to
correctly "guess" whether a theorem in topology would be right or
wrong using just spatial intuition and common sense. "Proof" has any
value in formal systems only, where you can define a set of rules to
live by. Again, you're just trying to lie there's some kind of
formalistic proof in reference to real world phenomena. The only proof
is common sense. If you hadn't been perpetually using such words as
"horse***" and "lie", you could have kept at least some of your
alleged reputation as an expert.


.