Content deleted Content added
Notification of altered sources needing review #IABot (v1.2.7.1) |
|||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{WikiProject Linguistics|class=C|importance=Mid}}▼
{{ArticleHistory
|action1=FAC
Line 7 ⟶ 6:
|action1oldid=62229476
|currentstatus=FFAC
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|
}}
==Name and place for article==
Line 59 ⟶ 61:
For anybody who can help, the citations still needed concern:
*<
*<
*<
*<
*<
*<
[[User:Sjcollier|sjcollier]] 00:55, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Line 176 ⟶ 178:
11. Qualitative and quantitative are defined in any dictionary, and dont really require further explanation. [[Italo-Celtic]] can be looked up in Wiki if interested. Lexicostatistics uses cognacy judgements (when used properly) and does provide additional information and so complements the method. [[User:Adresia|Adresia]] ([[User talk:Adresia|talk]]) 14:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
The word ''palabra'' is an instance of metathesis, but it's not the only similar one: ''peligro'' is metathesized from ''periculum'' "peril". A similar-sounding word ''culebra'' "snake" is not metathesized; the Latin form is ''coluber''. I propose the rule: r + stressed vowel + voiced stop + l -> l + stressed vowel + voiced stop + r. Can anyone provide other examples or counterexamples?
:Thought of a couple. ''milagro'' is metathesized from ''miraculum''; ''roble'' (from ''[[Quercus robur|robur]]'') was not metathesized, so there has to be a vowel before the ''r'' for it to metathesize. -[[User:PierreAbbat|phma]] 22:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Line 378 ⟶ 380:
[http://www.billposer.org/Papers/hokan.pdf Here on p. 8], Poser explains the true main reason for the significance of the establishment of systematic and regular sound correspondences: to rule out ''chance similarities'' – ''not'' to rule out borrowings! Moreover, the establishment of regular sound correspondences is the prerequisite for the reconstruction of proto-stages. It is, however, not in itself a magical fix against the borrowing problem; very often it does help to rule out borrowing, but not ''always'' and unfailingly. Clearly, this is not understood by many linguists. --[[User:Florian Blaschke|Florian Blaschke]] ([[User talk:Florian Blaschke|talk]]) 23:51, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
::Well, as some have observed this would mean that it is impossible to demonstrate relatedness between isolating languages - compounded if they have short CV roots. The fact is that there are differing standards of what is accepted as conclusive evidence of relationships between individual lingusts and between schools of linguists. [[User:Maunus|·maunus]] · [[User talk:Maunus|snunɐɯ·]] 00:26, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
:::Easy enough: Only accept the ''strictest'' standards – as set by the Indo-Europeanist tradition – as ''conclusive'' (rather than ''tentative'') evidence. As newer developments in Sino-Tibetan, Austroasiatic, Austronesian, Oto-Manguean and Niger-Congo show, even isolating languages are not completely devoid of morphology, and the problems can be overcome using a strict methodology. --[[User:Florian Blaschke|Florian Blaschke]] ([[User talk:Florian Blaschke|talk]]) 23:05, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
== External links modified ==
Line 391 ⟶ 394:
Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 01:49, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
== Translation ==
The German - to - English Translation is very bad. The fact that it is still somewhat understandable is surely an indication of PIE roots for practically all the words :D?
I am a native German and (UK) English speaker, so should someone be kind enough to forward me the original text, I shall do my best to translate it with a minimum of idiom, but an emphasis on the sense of the words, rather than a literal transcription, which seems to have been the case here. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/82.71.14.214|82.71.14.214]] ([[User talk:82.71.14.214#top|talk]]) 17:15, 11 December 2021 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
For instance, I might infer the following: -
"In this work I have attempted to set forth the inferred original Indo-European language side by side with its extant derived languages. The advantages of this [approach] include making clear to students the results of the investigation in a consolidated form, thereby elucidating the nature of particular [particular individual?] Indo-European languages.
There is, I think, more to be gained by this, namely to demonstrate the baselessness of the assumption that the non-Indian Indo-European languages were derived from Old-Indian (Sanskrit)." <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:82.71.14.214|82.71.14.214]] ([[User talk:82.71.14.214#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/82.71.14.214|contribs]]) 17:27, 11 December 2021 (UTC)</span>
== Slavic for nine ==
"The word, by regular sound changes from Proto-Slavic, should have been /nʲevʲatʲ/, but it is in fact /dʲevʲatʲ/." This is wrong; the /n/ had already changed to /d/ in Proto-Slavic and Proto-East Baltic, but remained /n/ in West Baltic. See [[wikt:Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/devętь|*devętь]]. [[User:PierreAbbat|phma]] ([[User talk:PierreAbbat|talk]]) 08:22, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
== 'Comparative method' should not redirect to 'comparative method (linguistics)' ==
Comparative method is something used across the social sciences, it's extremely odd that it is the title to exclusively comparative method in linguistic. It's misleading! This should be changed 100%. I have no clue why this is the case. [[User:LevatorScapulaeSyndrome|LevatorScapulaeSyndrome]] ([[User talk:LevatorScapulaeSyndrome|talk]]) 16:26, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
| |||