Re: FYI re: Greenberg's Universals

> Date:         Wed, 4 Oct 2000 00:45:09 -0400
> From:         Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...>
>
> Yoon Ha Lee wrote:
> > The "controversial" was what I meant by "next best thing."  Sorry.  :-p
> > I've heard several theories on Japanese and Korean and where they fit
> > into the world's languages, but my understanding was that no one really
> > had a consensus.
>
> It's been my impression that the Japanese-Korean connection is pretty
> well-accepted, it's just theories about where they fit in regards to
> other languages that's controversial.  Or am I completely wrong here?
The Japanese don't like the idea, as they culturally regard all things
Korean as inferior. And even apart from that, I don't think everybody
else is convinced either.

Trask, Historical Linguistics, 1996: "Recently [...] a number of
linguists have begun to argue that there is clear evidence that Korean
and Japanese are in fact related to each other, [...]."

He then goes on to say that the proponents of Altaic link "have not
succeeded in convincing the majority of specialists," but he doesn't
really say how they vote on the Korean-Japanese link itself.

Lars Mathiesen (U of Copenhagen CS Dep) <thorinn@...> (Humour NOT marked)