Mark P. Line scripsit:
> So you're saying that, knowing not much of anything about a language, it
> makes perfect sense to question primary sources on the basis of a single
> form for which you have no particular reason to believe (due to the
> widespread occurrence of external language names) that that single form is
> even native to the language in question.
Please remember that English, unlike Lojban, Laadan, and various natlangs,
doesn't have evidence morphemes. We know (or if we didn't, we know now)
that you're a professional; we know that you have pronounced opinions
about many things. We have no way of distinguishing between your
personal opinions, your professional judgment, and your reportage,
unless you tell us. Please do so.
> Clearly I've failed to inspire much professional trust from some people
> here, but that's okay. This list is recreational, and otherwise vacuous. I
> just need to remember to treat it that way.
Not quite vacuous, I think.
John Cowan www.ccil.org/~cowan [log in to unmask] www.reutershealth.com
[P]olice in many lands are now complaining that local arrestees are insisting
on having their Miranda rights read to them, just like perps in American TV
cop shows. When it's explained to them that they are in a different country,
where those rights do not exist, they become outraged. --Neal Stephenson