The Neolithic Hypothesis

[X99Lynx at aol.com]

In a message dated 4/10/99 12:02:12 AM, you wrote:

<<-- you're confusing description with prediction.  Language change _in the
past_ can be described and rules deduced, which can then be applied with
reasonable confidence to historic languages we don't have direct evidence
for.  >>

Probability is a tool can be used entirely to evaluate events that occured in
the past.  Carbon dating for example provides a predicatability in dating
accompanying non-organic artifacts that has been found to be very reliable.
"Predictability" is a factor that must be present before sampling validly can
be used in analysis.

Believe me, I'm not confused.

<<None of this makes us able to predict how the language will change _in the
future_. >>

A subject I don't think I've ever addressed.

<<People, particularly children and youngsters, change the way they
speak all the time. >>

In a message dated 4/9/99 11:38:19 PM, you wrote:

<<Languages change, but generally so slowly (on a human scale) that nobody's
conscious of it....>>

Regards,
Steve Long

[ Moderator's note:
  As I noted in a previous message, the two statements are not contradictory.
  --rma ]