Re: Remarkable Ancient Baltic Marking Found in Czekija
Tadas Blinda
> > Lorad might have his heart in the right place, but his etymologising
> > is pure creationism.
>
> > Linguistics is a science, Lorad. There are rules for etymology, just
> > as in physics or maths. Theorems have to be proven by reference to
> > precedents and convincing examples of other etymologies similar to the
> > proposed one. There are facts of phonology and phonological evolution
> > that cannot be ignored. I understand that people hate having their pet theories trashed, but if you reject creationism, flat earth theories and men from Mars, then you must reject false etymologies too.
On Aug 26, 10:24 pm, lorad <lorad...@cs.com> wrote:
> You know nothing about historical linguistics.
Really, now? And you do? What are your qualifications? Let's check
out one of your latest offerings:
> > > > I do not know how Czechs might translate 'Celkovice' - or
> > > > even if it the two words are still intelligible in a literal sense.
(Two words? I only see one.)
> > > > But any Latvian could identify them as meaning 'cela' ('road') +
> > > > 'kava' ('rest stop' / 'way station').
Oh, so you think it's Cel + kovice ? And why not Celko + vice?
Because it fits your crackpot theory better?
> > > "Road" is "ceļš" in Latvian. "Kava" is "coffee" in Lithuanian and
> > > Ukrainian.
>
> > > > And that's enough for me to seriously consider it probable.
It may be enough for you, but it's not enough for any serious
linguist.
Where are your proofs? (by reference to precedents and convincing
examples of other etymologies similar to the proposed one).
I repeat: Linguistics is a science. There are rules for etymology,
just
for physics and maths. There are facts of phonology and phonological
evolution that cannot be ignored. There are sociological facts that
cannot be ignored (such as that Cielkovice was no doubt named long
before the Europeans had ever seen coffee). Your etymologising is
pure creationism, down there with flat earth theories and men from
Mars.