Basque statistics - methodological contradiction

[Jon Patrick]

On Wed, 8 Sep 1999 08:57:40 +0100 (BST) Larry Trask said

    On Fri, 3 Sep 1999, Jon Patrick wrote:

    [snip quote from me]

    > This is presented after a long and detailed response to Lloyd
    > Anderson's revision of his 6 rules for deciding what should be used
    > as acceptable words in the study of early basque words. Larry's
    > rules are highly restrictive and my counter argument is that they
    > are too restrictive and they do not let the data speak for
    > themselves.

    The problem with "letting the data speak for themselves" is that ancient
    Basque words are vastly outnumbered today by words of more recent
    origin.  So, if we can't systematically exclude the newer words, we have
    no reasonable hope of picking out the ancient ones.

We agree on this item, we just have slightly different criteria on acheiving
systematic exclusion.

    > It seems to me, unless I am misreading something, that Larry's final
    > comment objects to someone else entertaining an a priori model of
    > the data as making assumptions, but doesn't perceive that he is
    > making assumptions from his own expectations of what a basque word
    > should look like.

    But, Jon, I am *not* making any assumptions in advance as to what a
    Basque word should look like.  Observe that not one of my proposed
    principal criteria has anything to do with the *phonological form* of a
    word.  My principal criteria are distribution, date of first
    attestation, and absence of the word in neighboring languages: nothing
    to do with form at all.  My secondary criteria exclude apparent nursery
    words and imitative words, which admittedly have something to do with
    form, but both of which can be identified by independent criteria having
    nothing to do with what I hope or expect to find in Pre-Basque.

I agree that this is what you have expressed clearly in the list. I also think
our differing views have been presented along with Lloyd Anderson's
observations of some of the issues that can arise from your criteria, that is,
they are not entirely value free and they can exclude useful evidence.
However I am concerned that you also operate with unspoken criteria, that is
from you undoubted rich knowledge of euskara, so that new possibilities are
quickly excluded without being given the merit of systematic and comprehensive
analysis. I DO NOT assert you do this deliberately. I just think it happens
because you view the materials from your particular experiences. Others have
the potential to use different deconstructions to arrive at different
illuminations, that is those of us whose minds are unclouded by prior
knowledge.
cheers
Jon
______________________________________________________________
The meaning of your communication is the response you get