Re: Minerva-paper on the Phaistos Disk : The main argument

On Aug 3, 4:44 pm, "graph...@xxxxxxx" <graph...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 3, 9:02 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Aug 3, 12:43 pm, "graph...@xxxxxxx" <graph...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 3, 6:11 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 3, 8:51 am, "graph...@xxxxxxx" <graph...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 3, 2:37 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 3, 3:11 am, "graph...@xxxxxxx" <graph...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 30, 5:02 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 25, 7:46 am, António Marques <m...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
graph...@xxxxxxxxxxxx:
Here is a good link about Tovar's ideas on the Risch-Chadwick Theory
: <http://www.varchive.org/dag/dialect.htm>

I'm not an expert in greek, but I'd be surprised if linguists offhand
considered any earliest attested variety of a language [group] as the
ancestor of all the other forms of that language [group]. Early tamil
isn't equated with proto-dravidian, nor sanskrit with proto-indic. Only
where a given dialect spread so much from its original home that it
differentiated into a whole group (cf. latin) does such a possibility
rise (i.e. early latin as the ancestor of all the romance languages).

Or, as Grumach and Bonfante have it, the different stages of Latin as
it spread across Europe were the ancestors of the different Romance
languages. Whichever region was colonized first has the most
conservative language, whichever was colonized last has the most
innovative language.
WRONG assertion !.. e.g. French v/. Rumanian. Guess which country has
been colonized first !...

Um, Gaul?

Of course not !.. Revise the History of Cesar's conquest of Gaul !!!

So M. Faucou, er, grapheus thinks Dacia was conquered before Gallia?

NICE TRICK !!!! You asked :> > > And which is more conservative? Um, French?

and when I answered TO THE SECOND QUESTION : "Um, French?" :> > Yes, of course ! "Old French", which is the result of the Cesar's
conquest and of the birth in France of Latin dialects.

you DEDUCED that I had answered the FIRST one !!!!!!

So, you could with a false naïvety, ask :

So what was "WRONG" about the assertion?
and state :
So was I not clear in stating the Grumach-Bonfante theory?

Rumanian is less conservative than French because its baseline was a
later variety of Latin.

OF COURSE, it's "a later variety" !!!!!!
But it is MORE CONSERVATIVE than French, i.e. that the PHONETIC
CHANGES from Latin to the modern language ARE LESS IMPORTANT !...
Your assertion was JUST STUPID because you NEGLECTED the "INFLUENCE of
the SUBSTRAT" in the PHONETIC CHANGES !..
You are as poor a linguist as a detective searching for my
identity !!!!!!!

I think you need to read Bonfante's book.

Of couse !.. Hide your ignorance behind a book you didn't
understand !..
A few examples :
Latin caballus --> French cheval / Rumanian cabalina
Latin capra --> French chèvre / Rumanian capra
Latin leo --> French lion / Rumanian leu
etc.

So you, too, think that vocabulary is the only interesting feature of
language?
.

Relevant Pages
Loading