Re: Linguistic roots Re: branches of science

On Nov 28, 9:51 am, b...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Robert Grumbine) wrote:
>
>
> >Robert, Seehttp://www.danshort.com/ie/timeline.htm
 for a brief
> >treatment of the roots of English.
>
>   It doesn't provide _roots_, it provides a description of ties of
> linguistic influence in the British isles (not English, notwithstanding
> its assertion.)   (Also misses divergence of Celtic into its two main
> branches and then subdivision, and omits Cornish entirely).
> 'Renaissance' is not a language I've ever heard of.  Perhaps you can
> explain that one?  It's also a pretty egregious lumping to put
> Spanish and 'American Indian' as a single group influence.
>
>   For both the language thing and for science, I consider it im****tant
> that the picture be meaningful.  It's insufficient to merely list
> a bunch of things in a pleasant graphic.
>
>

Hmm. I confess, I didn't read it. I'll do that right now.