Uniformitarianism and the Arrowwood

[JoatSimeon at aol.com]

In a message dated 6/30/01 4:46:49 PM Mountain Daylight Time, X99Lynx at aol.com
writes:

> You can "argue anything" you like about linguistic history that is strictly
> linguistic .  But the problem that's obvious is the non-linguistic elements.

-- you haven't yet shown any problem.

> What I've tried to show - and I think that I have shown - is that assumptions
> about the early "meaning" of many of these words may easily be doubted on
> closer examination.

-- again, no evidence whatsoever.