MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
How Fast Do Languages Change? (Linguistics)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 36, 37, 38 ... 48, 49, 50  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Ishmael wrote:
I read it and saw nothing odd. What does that mean?

You answered your own question. Oddness seems to provoke amusement. Funnily enough I've just emailed the section of the Megalithic Book dealing with Dartmoor to a woman who used to be President of the Dartmoor Preservation Association and seems to more or less endlessly campaign to save the British countryside. She thought it was a joke because it rubbishes every theory she's come across. (To be fair she only got the walk itself without an introduction to Mick's theory). Now she knows it isn't a spoof she won't be in the least amused.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Why couldn't we have done that walk when I was there? I could have been immortalized!
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

An Anglo-Saxon (art) specialist talking on the telly ("Anglo-Saxon Treasures") said that there were still traces of Anglo-Saxon words in the English language and instanced Mother, Father, Monday and Tuesday. She didn't seem to realise that several hundred thousand other words in the English language still bear traces of Anglo-Saxon. According to her colleagues anyway.
Send private message
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Watching that programme on the Anglo-Saxons last night, serpents and horned gods and boars were popping up everywhere, even their saints were given cloven hooves a la Hermes. All this artwork seemed to have been produced by the immigrants rather than native smiths though the knotted serpents looked quite Celtic to an untrained viewer. But the most surprising thing was that modern A-star jewellers, with the benefit of electricity-powered tools, couldn't have produced finer work.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Yes, one of the underlying themes of our book is that since the Ancients had the same brains as we do, it follows that their intellects are equal (minus the accumulated data-store). It follows therefore that they will be better than us in areas where they have decided to specialise and we haven't.

As we have seen elsewhere this probably applied to the domestication of animals. As far as jewellery-making goes it is obvious from grave goods that the Anglo-Saxons (to name but one group) were obsessed with personal adornment, presumably because they had no flash cars to flaunt their status with (horses are a bit samey). Hence they specialised in precious metal working on a scale way above our own.
Send private message
Leon



View user's profile
Reply with quote

berniegreen wrote:
Can you really hear a difference between the first aspirate in "gelado" and the one in "jeffe"? I can't and I have been studying
Spanish for about 6 years.


I've been living in Spain for 26 years and have never heard of such a difference, and have never detected it: there's no reason it should be different in the two words. But I have learned that jefe only has one f and vaca only one c.
Send private message
Edwin



View user's profile
Reply with quote

One detail in jewellery and other crafts:

Forgive me if this has already been suggested but this sort of work could be ideal for very short-sighted people and a way for them to contribute to the community and make a living.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

One of our number is putting up a valiant show on this forum

http://www.lingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3636&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=932205d2cd9e57fa145c3907f799a6f8

No need to read the ins-and-outs (unless like me you have a professional interest) but what is intriguing is how much Grrh's opponents are putting into trying to shut him up (for 47 pages so far!) Perhaps Grrh might let me (or us) know who he/she is.
Send private message
N R Scott


In: Middlesbrough
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
One of our number is putting up a valiant show on this forum

I've started reading this. I think I'll read the rest over the weekend, it's quite entertaining. If anything it's just reaffirming my faith in THOBR. I actually feel a bit sorry for the experts, they're so narrowly focused on their own area of interest they just can't see the wider picture. They reference and show deference to peer-reviewed papers and books by other 'experts', but they never go to the source of the argument. It's clear from some of their replies that they've never even questioned some of the basic assumptions of orthodoxy. It's quite amusing really.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

It's tragic.

I can't bring myself to read it.
Send private message
Chad


In: Ramsbottom
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
Perhaps Grrh might let me (or us) know who he/she is.

Wile E. Coyote...(Nemo).
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Howdyaknow, Chad?

What's the opposite of 'careful ignoral'? There are approximately 200 threads in this section of the forum (Historical and Evolutionary Linguistics). The longest of these threads runs to four pages. 'Ours' is currently forty-seven pages not out. What explanations are there for this? I had a somewhat similar experience in an Anglo-Saxon forum before being thrown out as a troll.
Send private message
Chad


In: Ramsbottom
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
Howdyaknow, Chad?

Who else would say "Grrh..."?
Send private message
Chad


In: Ramsbottom
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
What's the opposite of 'careful ignoral'? There are approximately 200 threads in this section of the forum (Historical and Evolutionary Linguistics). The longest of these threads runs to four pages. 'Ours' is currently forty-seven pages not out. What explanations are there for this? I had a somewhat similar experience in an Anglo-Saxon forum before being thrown out as a troll.

A sure sign that the existing paradigm is starting to crack.

The alternative can no longer be ignored, because orthodox linguists (though they are unable to admit it even to themselves) are starting to see grains of truth in the argument.

They are not taking up arms against Grrh... so much as against their own unacknowledgeable doubts.

The end is nigh... (They just don't know it yet.)
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Yes, very Hegelian. Even Freudian. But I have my doubts. Surely it is more likely that, because of 'careful ignoral' and other aids-to-orthodoxy, experts normally spend their entire working lives unaware of these arguments and hence fall upon them with some relish when, under our own expert prompting, they are eventually forced so to do.

Applied Epistemology is woefully weak on how the battle is won, as opposed to how to start guerrilla warfare that few notice.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 36, 37, 38 ... 48, 49, 50  Next

Jump to:  
Page 37 of 50

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group