Yakhontov

[Larry Trask]

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
On Sat, 6 Feb 1999, Alexis Manaster-Ramer wrote:

> Moreover, Larry makes an even bigger mistake (or else someone again
> misinformed him about what Starostin says).  Specifically, he claims
> that the Yakhontov method is to look at superficial phonetic
> similarities. However, Starostin (p. 25-26) clearly says that he
> (Starostin) is looking at matches based on sound correspondences and
> all other claims of the Altaic theory (such as morphological
> analysis, etymology, etc.), and indeed relates words which LOOK
> nothing alike, but are cognate under the Altaic theory, e.g., Turkic
> *yapur-gak : Mongolic *lab-c^in : Middle Korean *nip(h).  Since
> Yakhontov had not published a detailed description of his method, I
> cannot claim that this is how HE would have used it, but this is
> certainly how Starostin uses it.

> This goes to the heart of the whole fight about what role phonetic
> similarity plays in comparative linguistics (Larry claims none at
> all. I claim a subordinate but important and indeed probably crucial
> one). But note that Starostin is not doing anything that Larry could
> object to on this score.  He is NOT using phonetic similarity at
> all.

Starostin in his book may well be doing exactly what Alexis says.
I haven't seen the book, only one paragraph of it.

However, in the Mother Tongue exchange, Sergei was most certainly
working with mere perceived phonological and semantic resemblances, and
with nothing else at all.  That is obvious to anyone who reads the
relevant passage, and that is what got me confused about what Yakhontov
was saying in the first place.

Not guilty.


Larry Trask
COGS
University of Sussex
Brighton BN1 9QH
UK

larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk