 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Languages Forum » The Turkic Languages in a Nutshell... |
|
Page 1 of 30 Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 28, 29, 30 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Darkstar... |
 Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:42 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:20 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 21, 1:42 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
[quote:43e03becd6]I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these links
anyway:
A general ethnological and historical description of the Turkic
languages and peoples with many illustrations:http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/
The argumentation for the internal classification dendrograms and the
maps of the early hypothetical migrations of the Turkic peoples:http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/migration_and_classificat...
[/quote:43e03becd6]
Why is it unsigned? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 1:19 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 21, 3:52 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
[quote:96d4db529a]On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:a417b645-73e6-4e7c-867b-4ea1ae94c065 at (no spam) f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 1:42 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these links
anyway:
A general ethnological and historical description of the Turkic
languages and peoples with many illustrations:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/
The argumentation for the internal classification dendrograms and the
maps of the early hypothetical migrations of the Turkic peoples:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/migration_and_classificat....
Why is it unsigned?
It's Darkstar's own work, as may be seen by clicking on the
Home> link at the bottom of either page: the home page (at
http://indo-european-migrations.scienceontheweb.net/>) has
the title 'Historical Linguistics by Darkstar'.
[/quote:96d4db529a]
I did go to the homepage and saw that it was his/her website, but
nothing Darkstar has ever posted here suggests s/he has the competence
to perform massive lexical comparisons across the Turkic family (and
if s/he did do the work, why doesn't s/he provide the raw data). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Brian M. Scott... |
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 1:52 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
<grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
<news:a417b645-73e6-4e7c-867b-4ea1ae94c065 at (no spam) f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
in sci.lang:
[quote:d2f2ea27de]On Jun 21, 1:42 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these links
anyway:
A general ethnological and historical description of the Turkic
languages and peoples with many illustrations:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/
The argumentation for the internal classification dendrograms and the
maps of the early hypothetical migrations of the Turkic peoples:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/migration_and_classificat...
Why is it unsigned?
[/quote:d2f2ea27de]
It's Darkstar's own work, as may be seen by clicking on the
<Home> link at the bottom of either page: the home page (at
<http://indo-european-migrations.scienceontheweb.net/>) has
the title 'Historical Linguistics by Darkstar'.
Brian |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 5:42 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 21, 8:07 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
[quote:7d2abea36d]On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:19:12 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:d88cf03c-f16d-4bef-bc05-c76dd51703a8 at (no spam) x6g2000vbg.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 3:52 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:a417b645-73e6-4e7c-867b-4ea1ae94c065 at (no spam) f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 1:42 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these links
anyway:
A general ethnological and historical description of the Turkic
languages and peoples with many illustrations:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/
The argumentation for the internal classification dendrograms and the
maps of the early hypothetical migrations of the Turkic peoples:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/migration_and_classificat....
Why is it unsigned?
It's Darkstar's own work, as may be seen by clicking on the
Home> link at the bottom of either page: the home page (at
http://indo-european-migrations.scienceontheweb.net/>) has
the title 'Historical Linguistics by Darkstar'.
I did go to the homepage and saw that it was his/her
website, but nothing Darkstar has ever posted here
suggests s/he has the competence to perform massive
lexical comparisons across the Turkic family (and if s/he
did do the work, why doesn't s/he provide the raw data).
Considering his record here, do you really think that the
existence of that page is very strong evidence of such
competence?
[/quote:7d2abea36d]
That's what I said. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Brian M. Scott... |
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 6:07 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:19:12 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
<grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
<news:d88cf03c-f16d-4bef-bc05-c76dd51703a8 at (no spam) x6g2000vbg.googlegroups.com>
in sci.lang:
[quote:9919c38c40]On Jun 21, 3:52 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:a417b645-73e6-4e7c-867b-4ea1ae94c065 at (no spam) f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 1:42 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these links
anyway:
A general ethnological and historical description of the Turkic
languages and peoples with many illustrations:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/
The argumentation for the internal classification dendrograms and the
maps of the early hypothetical migrations of the Turkic peoples:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/migration_and_classificat...
Why is it unsigned?
It's Darkstar's own work, as may be seen by clicking on the
Home> link at the bottom of either page: the home page (at
http://indo-european-migrations.scienceontheweb.net/>) has
the title 'Historical Linguistics by Darkstar'.
I did go to the homepage and saw that it was his/her
website, but nothing Darkstar has ever posted here
suggests s/he has the competence to perform massive
lexical comparisons across the Turkic family (and if s/he
did do the work, why doesn't s/he provide the raw data).
[/quote:9919c38c40]
Considering his record here, do you really think that the
existence of that page is very strong evidence of such
competence?
Brian |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Darkstar... |
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 2:39 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
[quote:927e68bcef]On Jun 21, 8:07 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:19:12 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:d88cf03c-f16d-4bef-bc05-c76dd51703a8 at (no spam) x6g2000vbg.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 3:52 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:a417b645-73e6-4e7c-867b-4ea1ae94c065 at (no spam) f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 1:42 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these links
anyway:
A general ethnological and historical description of the Turkic
languages and peoples with many illustrations:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/
The argumentation for the internal classification dendrograms and the
maps of the early hypothetical migrations of the Turkic peoples:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/migration_and_classificat...
Why is it unsigned?
It's Darkstar's own work, as may be seen by clicking on the
Home> link at the bottom of either page: the home page (at
http://indo-european-migrations.scienceontheweb.net/>) has
the title 'Historical Linguistics by Darkstar'.
I did go to the homepage and saw that it was his/her
website, but nothing Darkstar has ever posted here
suggests s/he has the competence to perform massive
lexical comparisons across the Turkic family (and if s/he
did do the work, why doesn't s/he provide the raw data).
Considering his record here, do you really think that the
existence of that page is very strong evidence of such
competence?
That's what I said.
[/quote:927e68bcef]
Neither you have the competence to evaluate whether I have the
competence, so the link has been posted not for you. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 4:33 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 22, 8:39 am, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
[quote:059f880af9]Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Jun 21, 8:07 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:19:12 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:d88cf03c-f16d-4bef-bc05-c76dd51703a8 at (no spam) x6g2000vbg.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 3:52 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:a417b645-73e6-4e7c-867b-4ea1ae94c065 at (no spam) f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 1:42 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these links
anyway:
A general ethnological and historical description of the Turkic
languages and peoples with many illustrations:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/
The argumentation for the internal classification dendrograms and the
maps of the early hypothetical migrations of the Turkic peoples:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/migration_and_classificat...
Why is it unsigned?
It's Darkstar's own work, as may be seen by clicking on the
Home> link at the bottom of either page: the home page (at
http://indo-european-migrations.scienceontheweb.net/>) has
the title 'Historical Linguistics by Darkstar'.
I did go to the homepage and saw that it was his/her
website, but nothing Darkstar has ever posted here
suggests s/he has the competence to perform massive
lexical comparisons across the Turkic family (and if s/he
did do the work, why doesn't s/he provide the raw data).
Considering his record here, do you really think that the
existence of that page is very strong evidence of such
competence?
That's what I said.
Neither you have the competence to evaluate whether I have the
competence, so the link has been posted not for you.-
[/quote:059f880af9]
Your English really goes downhill when you get upset.
Why don't you just say whether you wrote all those pages about Turkic
glottochronology (and ethnolinguistics, which I don't care about and
didn't look at), and if you did, why don't you publish the data you
used in making the calculations? You probably already have an Excel
table or the equivalent containing the forms. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Panu... |
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 4:40 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 22, 3:39 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
[quote:46062f474e]
Neither you have the competence to evaluate whether I have the
competence, so the link has been posted not for you.
[/quote:46062f474e]
That you don't have the competence, is bleeding obvious to just about
anyone with an IQ higher than his shoe-size number. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Darkstar... |
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:04 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
[quote:e080729fa3]On Jun 22, 8:39 am, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Jun 21, 8:07 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:19:12 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:d88cf03c-f16d-4bef-bc05-c76dd51703a8 at (no spam) x6g2000vbg.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 3:52 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:a417b645-73e6-4e7c-867b-4ea1ae94c065 at (no spam) f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 1:42 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these links
anyway:
A general ethnological and historical description of the Turkic
languages and peoples with many illustrations:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/
The argumentation for the internal classification dendrograms and the
maps of the early hypothetical migrations of the Turkic peoples:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/migration_and_classificat...
Why is it unsigned?
It's Darkstar's own work, as may be seen by clicking on the
Home> link at the bottom of either page: the home page (at
http://indo-european-migrations.scienceontheweb.net/>) has
the title 'Historical Linguistics by Darkstar'.
I did go to the homepage and saw that it was his/her
website, but nothing Darkstar has ever posted here
suggests s/he has the competence to perform massive
lexical comparisons across the Turkic family (and if s/he
did do the work, why doesn't s/he provide the raw data).
Considering his record here, do you really think that the
existence of that page is very strong evidence of such
competence?
That's what I said.
Neither you have the competence to evaluate whether I have the
competence, so the link has been posted not for you.-
Your English really goes downhill when you get upset.
Why don't you just say whether you wrote all those pages about Turkic
glottochronology (and ethnolinguistics, which I don't care about and
didn't look at), and if you did, why don't you publish the data you
used in making the calculations? You probably already have an Excel
table or the equivalent containing the forms.
[/quote:e080729fa3]
The "Swadeshes" are publically available through Wikistationary,
there's a link inside the article. I manually composed about a half of
them and tried to re-check the rest — at least partly and wherever it
was essential. I don't see the necessity to publish the cognate pairs
and the calculations — no one would be checking. Even if they would,
they'll probably get it mixed up, because everyone has his own
personal counting method. That's not just taking one word and checking
it. I don't even remember seeing anyone publish intermediate
calculations in lexicostatistical studies. The results largely match
Dyachok's and Dybo's outcome, that's probably all one should know. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Darkstar... |
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:35 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Panu wrote:
[quote:1bc36a2080]On Jun 22, 3:39 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
Neither you have the competence to evaluate whether I have the
competence, so the link has been posted not for you.
That you don't have the competence, is bleeding obvious to just about
anyone with an IQ higher than his shoe-size number.
[/quote:1bc36a2080]
I'm not interested in your projections. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Darkstar... |
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:46 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Trond Engen wrote:
[quote:8d371b403e]Darkstar skreiv:
Peter T. Daniels:
Brian M. Scott:
Peter T. Daniels:
Brian M. Scott:
Peter T. Daniels:
Darkstar:
I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these
links anyway:
[...]
Why is it unsigned?
It's Darkstar's own work, [it] has the title 'Historical
Linguistics by Darkstar'.
[... N]othing Darkstar has ever posted here suggests s/he has the
competence to perform massive lexical comparisons across the
Turkic family (and if s/he did do the work, why doesn't s/he
provide the raw data).
Considering his record here, do you really think that the existence
of that page is very strong evidence of such competence?
That's what I said.
Neither you have the competence to evaluate whether I have the
competence, so the link has been posted not for you.
Right. Would you mind repeating Jens Elmeg�rd Rasmussen's evaluation of
your work on Cybalist? If he too is incompetent, would you give some
examples of who you'd find qualified?
--
Trond Engen
[/quote:8d371b403e]
I'm not playing games here. If you want to say something serious or
logically coherent, you still have the opportunity to do so. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:29 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 22, 12:04 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
[quote:76fd092d0d]Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Jun 22, 8:39 am, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Jun 21, 8:07 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:19:12 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:d88cf03c-f16d-4bef-bc05-c76dd51703a8 at (no spam) x6g2000vbg.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 3:52 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:a417b645-73e6-4e7c-867b-4ea1ae94c065 at (no spam) f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 1:42 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these links
anyway:
A general ethnological and historical description of the Turkic
languages and peoples with many illustrations:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/
The argumentation for the internal classification dendrograms and the
maps of the early hypothetical migrations of the Turkic peoples:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/migration_and_classificat...
Why is it unsigned?
It's Darkstar's own work, as may be seen by clicking on the
Home> link at the bottom of either page: the home page (at
http://indo-european-migrations.scienceontheweb.net/>) has
the title 'Historical Linguistics by Darkstar'.
I did go to the homepage and saw that it was his/her
website, but nothing Darkstar has ever posted here
suggests s/he has the competence to perform massive
lexical comparisons across the Turkic family (and if s/he
did do the work, why doesn't s/he provide the raw data).
Considering his record here, do you really think that the
existence of that page is very strong evidence of such
competence?
That's what I said.
Neither you have the competence to evaluate whether I have the
competence, so the link has been posted not for you.-
Your English really goes downhill when you get upset.
Why don't you just say whether you wrote all those pages about Turkic
glottochronology (and ethnolinguistics, which I don't care about and
didn't look at), and if you did, why don't you publish the data you
used in making the calculations? You probably already have an Excel
table or the equivalent containing the forms.
The "Swadeshes" are publically available through Wikistationary,
there's a link inside the article. I manually composed about a half of
them and tried to re-check the rest — at least partly and wherever it
was essential. I don't see the necessity to publish the cognate pairs
and the calculations — no one would be checking. Even if they would,
they'll probably get it mixed up, because everyone has his own
personal counting method. That's not just taking one word and checking
it. I don't even remember seeing anyone publish intermediate
calculations in lexicostatistical studies. The results largely match
Dyachok's and Dybo's outcome, that's probably all one should know.-
[/quote:76fd092d0d]
If you refuse to publish either your data or your methodology, your
findings cannot be replicated (let alone falsified), and you are not
doing science.
"Because I said so" is not science. Especially when "I" isn't
identified.
A superb model for publishing lexicostatistical work is Dyen, Kruskal,
and Black's study of modern IE languages, which is Transactions of the
American Philological Society 82/5 (1992). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Trond Engen... |
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:35 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Darkstar skreiv:
[quote:aa1df46074]Peter T. Daniels:
Brian M. Scott:
Peter T. Daniels:
Brian M. Scott:
Peter T. Daniels:
Darkstar:
I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these
links anyway:
[...]
Why is it unsigned?
It's Darkstar's own work, [it] has the title 'Historical
Linguistics by Darkstar'.
[... N]othing Darkstar has ever posted here suggests s/he has the
competence to perform massive lexical comparisons across the
Turkic family (and if s/he did do the work, why doesn't s/he
provide the raw data).
Considering his record here, do you really think that the existence
of that page is very strong evidence of such competence?
That's what I said.
Neither you have the competence to evaluate whether I have the
competence, so the link has been posted not for you.
[/quote:aa1df46074]
Right. Would you mind repeating Jens Elmegård Rasmussen's evaluation of
your work on Cybalist? If he too is incompetent, would you give some
examples of who you'd find qualified?
--
Trond Engen |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Darkstar... |
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:50 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
[quote:359a88d4d5]On Jun 22, 12:04 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Jun 22, 8:39 am, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Jun 21, 8:07 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:19:12 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:d88cf03c-f16d-4bef-bc05-c76dd51703a8 at (no spam) x6g2000vbg.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 3:52 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc... at (no spam) csuohio.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in
news:a417b645-73e6-4e7c-867b-4ea1ae94c065 at (no spam) f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com
in sci.lang:
On Jun 21, 1:42 pm, Darkstar <darkstar... at (no spam) front.ru> wrote:
I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these links
anyway:
A general ethnological and historical description of the Turkic
languages and peoples with many illustrations:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/
The argumentation for the internal classification dendrograms and the
maps of the early hypothetical migrations of the Turkic peoples:
http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/migration_and_classificat...
Why is it unsigned?
It's Darkstar's own work, as may be seen by clicking on the
Home> link at the bottom of either page: the home page (at
http://indo-european-migrations.scienceontheweb.net/>) has
the title 'Historical Linguistics by Darkstar'.
I did go to the homepage and saw that it was his/her
website, but nothing Darkstar has ever posted here
suggests s/he has the competence to perform massive
lexical comparisons across the Turkic family (and if s/he
did do the work, why doesn't s/he provide the raw data).
Considering his record here, do you really think that the
existence of that page is very strong evidence of such
competence?
That's what I said.
Neither you have the competence to evaluate whether I have the
competence, so the link has been posted not for you.-
Your English really goes downhill when you get upset.
Why don't you just say whether you wrote all those pages about Turkic
glottochronology (and ethnolinguistics, which I don't care about and
didn't look at), and if you did, why don't you publish the data you
used in making the calculations? You probably already have an Excel
table or the equivalent containing the forms.
The "Swadeshes" are publically available through Wikistationary,
there's a link inside the article. I manually composed about a half of
them and tried to re-check the rest — at least partly and wherever it
was essential. I don't see the necessity to publish the cognate pairs
and the calculations — no one would be checking. Even if they would,
they'll probably get it mixed up, because everyone has his own
personal counting method. That's not just taking one word and checking
it. I don't even remember seeing anyone publish intermediate
calculations in lexicostatistical studies. The results largely match
Dyachok's and Dybo's outcome, that's probably all one should know.-
If you refuse to publish either your data or your methodology, your
findings cannot be replicated (let alone falsified), and you are not
doing science.
"Because I said so" is not science. Especially when "I" isn't
identified.
A superb model for publishing lexicostatistical work is Dyen, Kruskal,
and Black's study of modern IE languages, which is Transactions of the
American Philological Society 82/5 (1992).
[/quote:359a88d4d5]
But no one is going to replicate these calculations or any other piece
of work. No one is going to replicate Dyen's calculations. You can
only attempt to REPEAT ALL of his study, which has been done by
several people already (including myself).
If someone wants to repeat the calculations alone, the lists are
readily available. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Tue Dec 01, 2009 4:31 am
|
|