Q: the 'only six' argument

[Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen]

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Dear List,

I have occasionally shocked my students by insisting that ONE *probative*
example is enough to prove the point for which it is probative. The
statement, of course, is tautological: If the examples did NOT prove its
point, it would not be probative, for that's what the word probative
means.
   The consequence is that, e.g., in Indo-European, certain disputed
groupings MUST be accepted unless we are willing to swallow very awkward
camels: If the Celtic superlative in *-isamo- and the Italic one in
*-is(s)amo- cannot be imagined to me parallel developments (from *-mHo-
[whence Ital./Celt *-amo-] with deictic vs. *-isto- with other
adjectives), and one cannot be assumed to have been borrowed from the
other (would you borrow a new form of the superlative, if your language
has a perfectly good one already?), then there WAS an Italo-Celtic node in
the splitting-up of the IE unity.  Similar arguments could be set up for
some of the points uniting Baltic and Slavic which look strong enough in
themselves to carry the burden of proof even if they were not supported by
others.
   Nice to see the list blossoming again.

   Jens E. Rasmussen