Alternative to the laryngeal theory

  • 181 Replies
  • 3124 Views
*

Rayzor

  • 6275
  • Looking for Occam
Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #150 on: August 19, 2017, 02:54:47 AM »
So, whom all on this forum do you consider a "word nerd"?

Anyone who knows the proto-indo-european word for catfish is a candidate. 

Plus I never knew gym's were supposed to be naked,  that was a bit of a shock.  Last time for me I suspect.

dispute: I want my rightful place as the greatest "troll" to ever grace this fine  website.
jroa: pro-tip: if you are going to troll people, don't tell them.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=72157.msg1961417#msg1961417

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Planar Moderator
  • 28947
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #151 on: August 19, 2017, 09:32:15 AM »
You, FalseProphet, and Flatassembler. By word nerd I mean people have at least studied some linguistics on the internet, if not in school. Y'all know some shorthand for terms that I don't know. 
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #152 on: August 19, 2017, 11:21:05 AM »
You, FalseProphet, and Flatassembler. By word nerd I mean people have at least studied some linguistics on the internet, if not in school. Y'all know some shorthand for terms that I don't know.

3 word nerds in one place irrelevant to linguistics is way, way more than normal. I think a spacetime rift is about to happen.
It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Who wants to be a firefly and who wants to be a blue whale?
-Sceptimatic

Please do not jizz to win an argument.
-Crutonius

I cannot possibly be wrong, can I?
-Heiwa

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Planar Moderator
  • 28947
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #153 on: August 19, 2017, 12:03:47 PM »
That is one of the things I love about this forum! SPACETIME RIFTS!
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #154 on: August 19, 2017, 12:05:54 PM »
All we need is one more word nerd and the rift will be in order!
It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Who wants to be a firefly and who wants to be a blue whale?
-Sceptimatic

Please do not jizz to win an argument.
-Crutonius

I cannot possibly be wrong, can I?
-Heiwa

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #155 on: August 19, 2017, 12:46:31 PM »
Then you could become one. Or, better yet, just read a few blog posts about interesting etymologies and tell us which etymology you liked the most. Later you could invite someone active on forums about linguistics to join us here, but I don't know if they would like to join a forum named "The Flat Earth Society".

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Planar Moderator
  • 28947
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #156 on: August 19, 2017, 01:01:32 PM »
Well, you joined!
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #157 on: August 19, 2017, 01:15:23 PM »
Well, I assume you will be honest and not make the linguist you invite think we've actually had a huge thread discussing the Laryngeal Theory in greatest possible details, will you?

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Planar Moderator
  • 28947
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #158 on: August 19, 2017, 01:18:52 PM »
OH I have an idea. You could start threads about several different linguistic theories as linguist bait.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #159 on: August 19, 2017, 01:28:46 PM »
Or maybe we could rename this thread to "Discussing linguistics" (or something like that) and stick it. And someone who looks at the first few posts would realize that it's not about something extremely pseudoscientific. What do you think?
« Last Edit: August 19, 2017, 01:36:24 PM by LovesLinguistics »

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #160 on: August 19, 2017, 01:42:05 PM »
Well, I recently read about the etymology of νερό (nero), which means water in Greek. In ancient Greek water was ύδωρ (hydor), so I didn't know how νερό came to be. Well it turns out that in medieval Greek fresh (as in not old and spoilt) water was called νηρόν ύδωρ (neeron hydor). Neeron came from the word nearos, which meant young or recent. So it seems like at some point they dropped the ύδωρ part for brevity purposes and νηρόν turned to νερό.

SCG, can you feel a rift forming yet?
It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Who wants to be a firefly and who wants to be a blue whale?
-Sceptimatic

Please do not jizz to win an argument.
-Crutonius

I cannot possibly be wrong, can I?
-Heiwa

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #161 on: August 19, 2017, 02:16:16 PM »
That's an excellent example of a common effect in linguistics, called metonymy!

*

FlatAssembler

  • 130
  • Not a FE-er
Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #162 on: August 21, 2017, 03:51:02 AM »
Quote
Anyway, when you were discussing Indo-European grammar, you somehow assumed that Indo-Uralic hypothesis is certainly wrong, that it's absurd to say that Finnish grammar is related to the Latin grammar. Why do you think that's the case?
I personally wouldn't assume an especially close connection between Indo-European and Uralic, as most of the people who try to reconstruct and older proto-language do, but between Indo-European and Austronesian. Look at the pronouns. Most of the proto-languages have a nasal in the 1st person singular, while both Indo-European and Austronesian have a velar. In PIE, it's *egjoh2, in PAN, it's *aku. Then look at the PAN Swadesh list. Doesn't it seem to you that PIE *r corresponds to PAN *l, that PIE *s corresponds to PAN *q and that PIE *d corresponds to PAN *d?
*treys (three)-*telu (three)
*romk (hand)-*lima (hand/five)
*ser (to flow)-*qalur (to flow)
*skend (skin)-*qanic (skin)
*stembh (to walk)-*qaqay (foot)
*smew (smoke)-*qabu (ash)
*serw (to watch)-*qalayaw (day)
*bheh2s (to talk)-*baqbaq (mouth)
*dwoh1 (two)-*dusa (two)
*dyews (sky)-*daya (upwards/height/sky)
*danu (river)-*danaw (lake)
Another potential cognate on the Swadesh list might be PIE *men (to think) and PAN *nemnen (to think), by the metathesis. FalseProphet, you know a lot more than I do about Austronesian, so, what do you think?
Fan of Stephen Wolfram.
This is my parody of the conspiracy theorists:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71184.0

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #163 on: August 21, 2017, 04:20:39 AM »
To me it seems more like that *s (s-mobile) was disproportionately common in the beginning of a word in PIE and that *q was disproportionately common in the beginning of a word in PAN, rather than that PIE *s actually corresponds to PAN *q. Also, you realize how much PIE and PAN were different grammatically, including the phonotactics (let's ignore the fact that their homelands were VERY far away from each other)?
To me it seems like you are a victim of the Bongo-Bongo effect, or are just trolling.

*

FalseProphet

  • 2574
  • Life is just a tale
Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #164 on: August 21, 2017, 06:46:53 AM »
ASorryx for myx current speech impediment

Flast asasasembler, give me tqwo rasndom lasnguasge fasmilieas, asnd I casn ashoqw yxou, thast theyx asre relasted.

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #165 on: August 30, 2017, 03:29:15 AM »
I think that FlatAssembler is falling to a trap called "The Birthday Paradox". If you choose a random person, the probability of that person having the same birthday as you do is only 1/365=0.27%. However, if you choose 20 random people, the probability of some of them sharing a birthday is not 1-((1-(1/365))20)=5.3%, as would appear at the first glance, but is actually 1-((1-(1/365))(20*20))=66.6%.
The same goes for phonemes on the Swadesh list. The probability of there being any particular apparent regular sound correspondence, like s:q or r:l, is very low. But if there are twenty phonemes, and twenty times twenty potential correspondences, you will probably find one if you search.

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #166 on: September 02, 2017, 06:44:24 AM »
I think that FlatAssembler is falling to a trap called "The Birthday Paradox". If you choose a random person, the probability of that person having the same birthday as you do is only 1/365=0.27%. However, if you choose 20 random people, the probability of some of them sharing a birthday is not 1-((1-(1/365))20)=5.3%, as would appear at the first glance, but is actually 1-((1-(1/365))(20*20))=66.6%.

That's not quite right. The probability of at least 1 shared birthday among n people is given by
(ignoring leap years).
For n = 20 this works out at 0.411 or about 41%.

If you choose 23 people at random it is odds-on that at least 2 will share a birthday.

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #167 on: September 03, 2017, 07:17:55 AM »
Well, yes, I made some easy-to-understand statistical approximation to explain my point. Or do you think that FlatAssembler is right?

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #168 on: September 03, 2017, 09:19:10 AM »
Well, yes, I made some easy-to-understand statistical approximation to explain my point.

Well, if you imagine your formula to be both easy-to-understand and a sufficiently accurate approximation to justify using the phrase 'is actually', then fair enough.

...is not 1-((1-(1/365))20)=5.3%, as would appear at the first glance, but is actually 1-((1-(1/365))(20*20))=66.6%.

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #169 on: September 12, 2017, 10:38:29 PM »
What do you guys think, would teaching linguistics in schools (not prescriptive grammar, but the actual linguistics, like the things we were discussing here) help students learn foreign languages more easily?

*

FlatEarthDenial

  • 303
  • FE is anti-science.
Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #170 on: September 14, 2017, 09:55:37 PM »
What do you guys think, would teaching linguistics in schools (not prescriptive grammar, but the actual linguistics, like the things we were discussing here) help students learn foreign languages more easily?
Linguistics is interesting, as far as I could understand what this thread was about, but I don't think many students could understand it. I've also made some topics about the language, such as this one:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=66665.0
FlatAssembler is also active here? What a surprise! He is also active on the linguistforum. And my nickname on the linguistforum is LinguistSkeptic.
A former Flat Earther.
This is my story, which I'd encourage every Flat Earther to read:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67051.0

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #171 on: September 17, 2017, 11:53:02 AM »
Well, you know, there is a lot of evidence that teaching phonology early in schools helps children learn how to spell (It's called phonics.).

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #172 on: September 17, 2017, 08:57:07 PM »
There is evidence that phonics helps? Teaching young children to read nonsense words helps? Think with your own head, LovesLinguistics, please.

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #173 on: September 17, 2017, 09:00:43 PM »
So, you think we should teach linguistics at schools. Based on what I've seen, linguistics turned to guessing the grammars of some hypothetical ancient languages that probably didn't even really exist. We should teach that in school? We need free thinkers, people! And, yes, we should stick this thread, just so people know what modern science has turned into.

*

FalseProphet

  • 2574
  • Life is just a tale
Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #174 on: September 18, 2017, 12:14:22 AM »
So, you think we should teach linguistics at schools. Based on what I've seen, linguistics turned to guessing the grammars of some hypothetical ancient languages that probably didn't even really exist. We should teach that in school? We need free thinkers, people! And, yes, we should stick this thread, just so people know what modern science has turned into.

Are you Croatian, too?

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #175 on: September 18, 2017, 02:34:32 AM »
No, I am from America and I, unlike LovesLinguistics, actually have the experience with phonics being taught in school.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Planar Moderator
  • 28947
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #176 on: September 18, 2017, 01:08:51 PM »
Are you still hooked on phonics? There's probably a 12 step program for that.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #177 on: September 19, 2017, 05:39:49 AM »
Absurd number of word nerds reached. Spacetime rift imminent.
It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Who wants to be a firefly and who wants to be a blue whale?
-Sceptimatic

Please do not jizz to win an argument.
-Crutonius

I cannot possibly be wrong, can I?
-Heiwa

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #178 on: September 21, 2017, 11:56:31 AM »
What's absurd there?

Re: Alternative to the laryngeal theory
« Reply #179 on: September 23, 2017, 01:28:33 PM »
Someone has just openned a thread to give examples of some actually absurd discussions:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=72120.0