Re: Edenics

Andreas Johansson wrote:

>Quoting "Mark P. Line" <mark@...>:
>
>
>
>>william drewery said:
>>
>>
>>>I have recently ran into these sites about "edenics",
>>>which I gather is the study of Eden. But they all seem
>>>to be linked by the ida that ALL languages descend
>>>from some sort of Proto-Hebrew. Most of the arguments
>>>I've seen on the sites are laughable at best, but I
>>>was hoping to find out if there was anything to this
>>>idea, ad if not, where I could find some good
>>>counter-arguments.
>>>
>>>
>>I'm not going to worry about counter-arguments until I've seen an argument
>>*for* the idea.
>>
>>(Showing that 'fa' = "eat" in Kubamangaranga while 'pa' = "food" in
>>Dienhua does *not* qualify as an argument that these two languages are
>>related. The fringe literature of self-appointed amateur linguistics is
>>full of this crap. "All languages are descended from X!" where X can be
>>Sanskrit, Proto-Hebrew, PIE, Ancient Japanese, or whatever.)
>>
>>
>
>Why do they always pick some gaga old language? It would be much funnier to
>prove that all languages descend from 19th C Rioplatense Spanish.
>
>
>
Or time-travelling 21st century Englishmen.

Reply