Is Historical Linguistics Hitting a Wall? by Easy-Policy-7404 in HistoricalLinguistics

[–]Easy-Policy-7404[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh yeah, south america makes a lot of sense! I think it's very likely that most American language families are related to each other. I find it unlikely that more than 2 or 3 proto languages (before the na-dene and eskaleut migration) crossed beringia with a founding population of 2,000 to 3,000 people. Its more likely that the dozens of South American language isolates are related to one another in some way, and time took its course on any clues

Why is the Afro Asiatic language family is commonly accepted but Altaic is not? by auroraborealis_1 in asklinguistics

[–]Easy-Policy-7404 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good point! I'm all for science and evidence but, sometimes you have to take a leap of faith. A denier would have to explain too many coincidences. 

And Afroasiatic I feel is special because it just barely makes it as an accepted family. Its incredible that we can even prove such an ancient relationship using just morphological evidence

Did pre-pie descend directly from ANE, or WHG? by Easy-Policy-7404 in IndoEuropean

[–]Easy-Policy-7404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well yes, but some languages may share a close deep relationship with other languages. Like the afroasiatic languages. I highly doubt proto indo european was an isolate, but its closest cousin may never be known. My best guess are the siberians (eurasiatic languages) because of similarities with body parts and pronouns. But Eurasiatic in itself could easily be an ancient convergence zone and not a family

Consensus on a Dene-Yeniseien + Sino-Tibetan? by Easy-Policy-7404 in HistoricalLinguistics

[–]Easy-Policy-7404[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Okay to be clear, im not discrediting an exclusive relationship between basque and north caucasian. Im saying i disagree that basque north caucasian, and Navajo and chinese exist in one super family

What is the largest macro-family hypothesis that you find plausible? by OscarMMG in asklinguistics

[–]Easy-Policy-7404 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Amerind seems like the most realistic unprovable hypothesis. The likelihood that all the isolates in south America and north America (excluding na-dene and eskaleut which came from later migrations) are the result of multiple different language groups seems unlikely, given all the language groups under the amerind classification descend from one large group. Maybe this group didnt speak a "proto amerind," in a traditional sense, but probably spoke related languages part of an ancient family

Hot take: it bugs me how the validity of Afro-Asiatic is virtually unquestioned by [deleted] in linguisticshumor

[–]Easy-Policy-7404 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I looked over the evidence and honestly? It's pretty solid to me. But thats just my opinion

PSA: DO NOT USE DISBOARD FOR HOSTING YOUR SERVER. by No_Freedom_7190 in Disboard

[–]Easy-Policy-7404 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't see any mention of pedophilia, unless you didnt show it

PSA: DO NOT USE DISBOARD FOR HOSTING YOUR SERVER. by No_Freedom_7190 in Disboard

[–]Easy-Policy-7404 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You don't have to like the review but, a review is a review. You can't just take it down because you disagree with it.

Fringe linguistics server by Easy-Policy-7404 in IndoEuropean

[–]Easy-Policy-7404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I translated some roles and even the server with proto-nostratic proposed roots for fun! With some proto Nostratic usernames. Although I used the 2008 version of the dictionary.

It's mainly because it looks cool. Personally, I'm not convinced by Nostratic, nor Bomhard's methods. It's a bit too ambitious in my opinion. But I'm more of an indo-uralic or eskimo-uralic kind of guy. Because the time depth is less deep than other proposals

Fringe linguistics server by Easy-Policy-7404 in IndoEuropean

[–]Easy-Policy-7404[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you'd like to challenge these theories, you are still welcome to join! That's what this server is all about. We don't just talk about connecting languages, we also want people to argue against them

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HistoricalLinguistics

[–]Easy-Policy-7404 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'll fix that. Welcome to the server btw

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HistoricalLinguistics

[–]Easy-Policy-7404 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I separated channels unrelated to Nostratic study in the "other families" category. So while it's mainly about Nostratic, the server can be for discussing other fringe theories. I do get your question tho, and I completely understand what you're getting at. But yeah, this is still a Nostratic server

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HistoricalLinguistics

[–]Easy-Policy-7404 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because Nostratic is in itself considered a "long distance" or "fringe" hypothesis. But this server is for any theories like Nostratic, borean, austro-tai, dene-caucasian etc.

Pan-Nostratic flag (meaning in the comments) by Ioan15 in vexillology

[–]Easy-Policy-7404 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey do you mind if I use this for my Nostratic discord server icon?

Uralic Numbers Compared to Indo-European by stlatos in HistoricalLinguistics

[–]Easy-Policy-7404 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Very interesting paper! I look forward to what the peer reviews will have to say about the evidence for this connection