 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Languages Forum » Everett refuted!!... |
|
Page 9 of 11 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| johnk... |
 Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:09 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 2:12 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 3:15 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
Now that I've read the reply (it's only about 10 pages), I can let you
know that they say (in effect) that Everett weaseled in that reply --
that he misrepresented the dates of his changes of heart in earlier
publications, and that assertions made in the 2009 piece invalidate a
number of the arguments on which his earlier assertions (regarding the
absence of recursion in Piraha) had rested.
Took you a long time to read that paper and give
a brief summary, but thank you for this anyway.
Going by apperception I never took Everett seriously,
[/quote]
[quote]a hype of that sort that goes against the basic
understanding of language usually eliminates itself
after a short while.
[/quote]
By that logic, you should have been gone years ago. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:32 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 3:12 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 3:15 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
Now that I've read the reply (it's only about 10 pages), I can let you
know that they say (in effect) that Everett weaseled in that reply --
that he misrepresented the dates of his changes of heart in earlier
publications, and that assertions made in the 2009 piece invalidate a
number of the arguments on which his earlier assertions (regarding the
absence of recursion in Piraha) had rested.
Took you a long time to read that paper and give
a brief summary,
[/quote]
Excuse me? I took it from the mailbox on Thursday afternoon (on the
way out to do errands) and described it on Friday morning.
Whereas for all we know the only "scientific" reading you've done was
in 1974/75, plus a few volumes of the annual UCLA IE conferences,
though you're never able to say exactly _what_ you've read.
[quote]but thank you for this anyway.
Going by apperception I never took Everett seriously,
a hype of that sort that goes against the basic
understanding of language usually eliminates itself
after a short while.[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Franz Gnaedinger... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 6:22 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 1:32 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 31, 3:12 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
On Oct 30, 3:15 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
Now that I've read the reply (it's only about 10 pages), I can let you
know that they say (in effect) that Everett weaseled in that reply --
that he misrepresented the dates of his changes of heart in earlier
publications, and that assertions made in the 2009 piece invalidate a
number of the arguments on which his earlier assertions (regarding the
absence of recursion in Piraha) had rested.
Took you a long time to read that paper and give
a brief summary,
Excuse me? I took it from the mailbox on Thursday afternoon (on the
way out to do errands) and described it on Friday morning.
Whereas for all we know the only "scientific" reading you've done was
in 1974/75, plus a few volumes of the annual UCLA IE conferences,
though you're never able to say exactly _what_ you've read.
[/quote]
Sorry, I did you wrong, thought you are speaking
about the article you mentioned on July 30.
And why should I read linguistic literature, being
born in Switzerland, breathing the same air De
Saussure did? living in Zurich and walking the
same streets Pokorny walked? I just have it in my
Swiss genes, and I came very far, don't you think?
I started my Magdalenian experiment in early 2005,
and it carries me on and on, against all adversity. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 6:37 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 12:22 pm, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 31, 1:32 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
On Oct 31, 3:12 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
On Oct 30, 3:15 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
Now that I've read the reply (it's only about 10 pages), I can let you
know that they say (in effect) that Everett weaseled in that reply --
that he misrepresented the dates of his changes of heart in earlier
publications, and that assertions made in the 2009 piece invalidate a
number of the arguments on which his earlier assertions (regarding the
absence of recursion in Piraha) had rested.
Took you a long time to read that paper and give
a brief summary,
Excuse me? I took it from the mailbox on Thursday afternoon (on the
way out to do errands) and described it on Friday morning.
Whereas for all we know the only "scientific" reading you've done was
in 1974/75, plus a few volumes of the annual UCLA IE conferences,
though you're never able to say exactly _what_ you've read.
Sorry, I did you wrong, thought you are speaking
about the article you mentioned on July 30.
And why should I read linguistic literature, being
born in Switzerland, breathing the same air De
Saussure did? living in Zurich and walking the
same streets Pokorny walked? I just have it in my
Swiss genes, and I came very far, don't you think?
I started my Magdalenian experiment in early 2005,
and it carries me on and on, against all adversity.-
[/quote]
This may be the most revealing thing you have ever posted.
If you don't understand how damning it is, you are truly hopeless.
If, OTOH, you were trying to make a joke, you didn't succeed. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 7:13 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 1:02 pm, Athel Cornish-Bowden <acorn... at (no spam) ibsm.cnrs-mrs.fr>
wrote:
[quote]On 2009-10-31 17:37:43 +0100, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> said:
On Oct 31, 12:22 pm, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
On Oct 31, 1:32 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
If, OTOH, you were trying to make a joke, you didn't succeed.
Does Franz make jokes? I hadn't noticed. I thought he always took
himself immensely seriously.
[/quote]
Indeed. That's why I suggested "trying." But admitting that one has
never read anything in the field on which one expatiates, simply
because one is of the same nationality as two great practitioners in
that field, stretches credulity if it is intended to be taken
seriously. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Franz Gnaedinger... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:18 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 6:13 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]
Indeed. That's why I suggested "trying." But admitting that one has
never read anything in the field on which one expatiates, simply
because one is of the same nationality as two great practitioners in
that field, stretches credulity if it is intended to be taken
seriously.
[/quote]
My jokes are only complete when I get your reply
that is always so damn serious - you are trying
to be drier than an Englishman, and you succeed,
which is the real joke for me. I made the same
joke before, about inhaling the air de Saussure
breathed, and traipsing along the ways Pokorny
walked, but you didn't notice. Now you did, and
wrote a rewarding reply, thank you. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:44 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 3:18 pm, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 31, 6:13 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
Indeed. That's why I suggested "trying." But admitting that one has
never read anything in the field on which one expatiates, simply
because one is of the same nationality as two great practitioners in
that field, stretches credulity if it is intended to be taken
seriously.
My jokes are only complete when I get your reply
that is always so damn serious - you are trying
to be drier than an Englishman, and you succeed,
which is the real joke for me. I made the same
joke before, about inhaling the air de Saussure
breathed, and traipsing along the ways Pokorny
walked, but you didn't notice. Now you did, and
wrote a rewarding reply, thank you.
[/quote]
So you consider making yourself look like an ass "rewarding." That
accounts to a small degree for your continuing to present your
fantasies as if they were some sort of "science." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Athel Cornish-Bowden... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:02 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 2009-10-31 17:37:43 +0100, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> said:
[quote]On Oct 31, 12:22 pm, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
On Oct 31, 1:32 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
If, OTOH, you were trying to make a joke, you didn't succeed.
[/quote]
Does Franz make jokes? I hadn't noticed. I thought he always took
himself immensely seriously.
--
athel |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Carl Taylor... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:00 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 12:22 pm, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 31, 1:32 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
On Oct 31, 3:12 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
On Oct 30, 3:15 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
Now that I've read the reply (it's only about 10 pages), I can let you
know that they say (in effect) that Everett weaseled in that reply --
that he misrepresented the dates of his changes of heart in earlier
publications, and that assertions made in the 2009 piece invalidate a
number of the arguments on which his earlier assertions (regarding the
absence of recursion in Piraha) had rested.
Took you a long time to read that paper and give
a brief summary,
Excuse me? I took it from the mailbox on Thursday afternoon (on the
way out to do errands) and described it on Friday morning.
Whereas for all we know the only "scientific" reading you've done was
in 1974/75, plus a few volumes of the annual UCLA IE conferences,
though you're never able to say exactly _what_ you've read.
Sorry, I did you wrong, thought you are speaking
about the article you mentioned on July 30.
And why should I read linguistic literature, being
born in Switzerland, breathing the same air De
Saussure did? living in Zurich and walking the
same streets Pokorny walked? I just have it in my
Swiss genes, and I came very far, don't you think?
I started my Magdalenian experiment in early 2005,
and it carries me on and on, against all adversity.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
Let's not forget that Zurich was also home to the artistic movement
known as Dadaism. Could it be said that you are doing Dadaist
linguistics?
clt |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| PaulJK... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:15 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Franz Gnaedinger wrote:
[quote]On Oct 31, 1:32 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
On Oct 31, 3:12 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
On Oct 30, 3:15 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
Now that I've read the reply (it's only about 10 pages), I can let you
know that they say (in effect) that Everett weaseled in that reply --
that he misrepresented the dates of his changes of heart in earlier
publications, and that assertions made in the 2009 piece invalidate a
number of the arguments on which his earlier assertions (regarding the
absence of recursion in Piraha) had rested.
Took you a long time to read that paper and give
a brief summary,
Excuse me? I took it from the mailbox on Thursday afternoon (on the
way out to do errands) and described it on Friday morning.
Whereas for all we know the only "scientific" reading you've done was
in 1974/75, plus a few volumes of the annual UCLA IE conferences,
though you're never able to say exactly _what_ you've read.
Sorry, I did you wrong, thought you are speaking
about the article you mentioned on July 30.
And why should I read linguistic literature, being
born in Switzerland, breathing the same air De
Saussure did? living in Zurich and walking the
same streets Pokorny walked? I just have it in my
Swiss genes, and I came very far, don't you think?
[/quote]
Oh, I see, that's how it works. Super!
In that case, I don't ever need to read anything written
by Pokorny, because his name sounds Czech and
all he ever knew should be in my genes too.
[quote]I started my Magdalenian experiment in early 2005,
and it carries me on and on, against all adversity.
[/quote]
It's a waste of time making heavier than air baloons.
pjk |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| PaulJK... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:21 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Franz Gnaedinger wrote:
[quote]On Oct 31, 6:13 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
Indeed. That's why I suggested "trying." But admitting that one has
never read anything in the field on which one expatiates, simply
because one is of the same nationality as two great practitioners in
that field, stretches credulity if it is intended to be taken
seriously.
My jokes are only complete when I get your reply
that is always so damn serious - you are trying
to be drier than an Englishman, and you succeed,
which is the real joke for me. I made the same
joke before, about inhaling the air de Saussure
breathed, and traipsing along the ways Pokorny
walked, but you didn't notice. Now you did, and
wrote a rewarding reply, thank you.
[/quote]
Okay, so this was a "joke".
That means the humming sessions remain safely at
the top rung of the ladder.
pjk |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Franz Gnaedinger... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 1:30 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 1, 5:15 am, "PaulJK" <paul.kr... at (no spam) paradise.net.nz> wrote:
[quote]
Oh, I see, that's how it works. Super!
In that case, I don't ever need to read anything written
by Pokorny, because his name sounds Czech and
all he ever knew should be in my genes too.
[/quote]
Is Pokorny a Czech name? Pokorny was a most
interesting character, a Jew born and living in Berlin
and aspiring to become a super German, but he
also delved in Celtic culture and revived Irish, for
which he was given the Irish passport by de Vries
as I recall, and owing to his Irish passport he was
given the Swiss passport when the war started,
and so he found refuge in Zurich where he lived
for the rest of his life, but giving lessons in Munich
and other places too. I may well have crossed his
path, more than once, and surley do I walk the streets
he walked. The university library of Zurich has a book
on him, written by an Englishman or an American,
as I recall, I leaved through it once, for half an hour,
but didn't lend it out. I have a gift Goethe described:
I can open a book and do it almost always at the right
pages, my eyes falling on the crucial lines. Another
precious gift freeing me from the drab of reading,
of really reading. Who would read when he can suck
up information in the easy ways I do? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 4:36 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 1, 6:30 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 1, 5:15 am, "PaulJK" <paul.kr... at (no spam) paradise.net.nz> wrote:
Oh, I see, that's how it works. Super!
In that case, I don't ever need to read anything written
by Pokorny, because his name sounds Czech and
all he ever knew should be in my genes too.
Is Pokorny a Czech name? Pokorny was a most
interesting character, a Jew born and living in Berlin
and aspiring to become a super German, but he
also delved in Celtic culture and revived Irish, for
which he was given the Irish passport by de Vries
as I recall, and owing to his Irish passport he was
given the Swiss passport when the war started,
and so he found refuge in Zurich where he lived
for the rest of his life, but giving lessons in Munich
and other places too. I may well have crossed his
path, more than once, and surley do I walk the streets
he walked. The university library of Zurich has a book
on him, written by an Englishman or an American,
as I recall, I leaved through it once, for half an hour,
but didn't lend it out. I have a gift Goethe described:
I can open a book and do it almost always at the right
pages, my eyes falling on the crucial lines. Another
precious gift freeing me from the drab of reading,
of really reading. Who would read when he can suck
up information in the easy ways I do?
[/quote]
How do you know that there isn't _even more_ crucial information on
the pages you _don't_ look at? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| PaulJK... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:25 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
[quote]On Nov 1, 6:30 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f... at (no spam) bluemail.ch> wrote:
On Nov 1, 5:15 am, "PaulJK" <paul.kr... at (no spam) paradise.net.nz> wrote:
Oh, I see, that's how it works. Super!
In that case, I don't ever need to read anything written
by Pokorny, because his name sounds Czech and
all he ever knew should be in my genes too.
Is Pokorny a Czech name?
[/quote]
That is not what I suggested. I have no idea if this particular
linguist's name is originally Czech. It could have some other
Slavic roots. However, it is a very common Czech surname
meaning "Humble".
[quote]Pokorny was a most
interesting character, a Jew born and living in Berlin
and aspiring to become a super German, but he
also delved in Celtic culture and revived Irish, for
which he was given the Irish passport by de Vries
as I recall, and owing to his Irish passport he was
given the Swiss passport when the war started,
and so he found refuge in Zurich where he lived
for the rest of his life, but giving lessons in Munich
and other places too. I may well have crossed his
path, more than once, and surley do I walk the streets
he walked. The university library of Zurich has a book
on him, written by an Englishman or an American,
as I recall, I leaved through it once, for half an hour,
but didn't lend it out. I have a gift Goethe described:
I can open a book and do it almost always at the right
pages, my eyes falling on the crucial lines. Another
precious gift freeing me from the drab of reading,
of really reading. Who would read when he can suck
up information in the easy ways I do?
How do you know that there isn't _even more_ crucial information on
the pages you _don't_ look at?
[/quote]
Most of the people I know, know that it is never possible to
be certain. Franz is not one of them.
Actually, I am envious. 
pjk |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Franz Gnaedinger... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 1:15 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 1, 3:36 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]
How do you know that there isn't _even more_ crucial information on
the pages you _don't_ look at?
[/quote]
People who know me are wondering at how much
and how many different things I read, but if you tell
me I don't read much I have the grace to do you
the favor of playing the illiterate ... Goethe called
reading a highly demanding art. I am good at reading,
having read so much and so many different things
in my life. I easily find the crucial statements,
I can most always skip the preliminaries and go by
apperception, I feel the music change when it comes
to the important part. Often I bought a book because
I opened it in the store and read a fascinating
paragraph - and when I read it at home, from the first
to the last page, there was nothing more, only that
one paragraph I had already absorbed in the bookstore. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:13 am
|
|