Jump to content

Talk:Eurasiatic languages: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
assess
Line 6: Line 6:
{{WikiProject Western Asia|class=C|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Western Asia|class=C|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Estonia|class=C|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Estonia|class=C|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Russia|class=C|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Russia|class=C|importance=Low|ethno=yes|lang=yes}}
{{WikiProject Turkey|class=C|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Turkey|class=C|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Iran|class=C|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Iran|class=C|importance=Low}}

Revision as of 19:13, 2 July 2011

Is not Dravidian languages included in the family?

Burgaz 00:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, but it is Nostratic, which is the higher branch to which Eurasiatic-Amerind belongs. 86.140.250.213 (talk) 15:03, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alleging that an edit was perverse

Today, an anonymous contributor deleted two simple words from the opening sentence. They changed "the late Joseph Greenberg" to "Joseph Greenberg". Now, while a case could be made that this is righteous, that Greenberg's being dead is irrelevant, I would observe that the edit was a perverse action in view of the *way* it was done and in view of certain facts.

It is easy to argue that Greenberg's being alive or dead *is* relevant. Furthermore, it *is a fact* that Greenberg is dead. Since it is a fact, I object to someone suppressing the fact *while exercising bad Wikipedia citizenship*. This person acted anonymously and felt no duty to justify their edit -- they neither discussed the deletion on this page nor made a note for the History page. Hurmata 03:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Buyeo."

Reverted edit by Licqua alleging the putative Korean-Japanese-Ainu node endorsed by Joseph Greenberg is "known outside Greenberg's work as the Buyeo languages". Licqua, you don't support this claim with any reference. Wikipedia requires that statements be verifiable and yours is not. Anyone familiar with the literature knows that the Korean-Japanese-Ainu grouping is not claimed by anyone to be descended from the Buyeo-Goguryeo languages. Martine Robbeets, for instance, has been emphasizing that the Goguryeo language is not an ancestor of Japanese, but (if actually related to it) a parallel development from a common ancestor. Modern Korean, likewise, is also not descended from the Buyeo-Goguryeo language but, more probably, from the language of Silla. A further problem is that most of the scholars who endorse a Japanese-Korean relationship don't endorse their relationship to Ainu and often vigorously reject it. Get your facts straight before reverting. VikSol 19:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How the hell agglutinative,SOV,no gender,no dual.. Turkic and Finno-Ugric are more close to indoeuropean than semitic do,and there are far more common semitic-indoeuropean common roots than ie-X ones?

How the hell agglutinative,SOV,no gender,no dual.. Turkic and Finno-Ugric are more close to indoeuropean than semitic do,and there are far more common semitic-indoeuropean common roots than ie-X ones?

So common roots and grammatical features shared by indoeuropean-finnougric and not by indoeuropean-semitic are in fact A FINNO-UGRIC SUPERSTRATUM IN INDOEUROPEAN.

Humanbyrace (talk) 00:26, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]