|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Northeast Caucasian languages
The reference for this paragraph leads to what seems to be a non published draft by Robertson  (see page 28: " This version is a draft of a work in progress") . If there is no alternative reference published it seems to need some special argumentation to add here a non published work as the only basis for a theory. I mean that if this is the only reference then seems non valid and the section should be deleted till it is published in some reliable source, but that maybe it has been (but not stated in the article) or there is another special reason to this exception that I am not aware of. --Dumu Eduba (talk) 11:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
- The Dene-Caucasian (Sino-Caucasian, etc.) hypothesis frequently includes Etruscan, but I don't know about a link specifically with NC. Little of this stuff gets into peer-reviewed journals to begin with, so it would probably be responsible of us to avoid ms. kwami (talk) 11:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. While it's not exactly fringy, there are tons of these long-distance proposals with very little evidence backing them up. You can suggest that English is a Chibchan language with the methodology that many of these proposals use. The approach is great to suggest possibilities to look into, including connections that people might not otherwise have thought of, but has no rigor to stand on its own. kwami (talk) 10:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
- I will be guided by yourselves, and I wouldn't suggest it's worth more than a mention at present. But I note that it provides better evidence than the generality of dubious inter-family relationship ideas, and is not recycling any other fringe theories. It's also not a particularly long-distance theory. Richard Keatinge (talk) 12:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
- It could very well work out. People were wary of Dene-Yeneseian too before Vaida gave his talks/pubs. But Tyrsenian is so poorly attested that I'd rather wait for some response to this work. At least a passing note that it's interesting and maybe he's on to something. It's just so easy to massage the data. kwami (talk) 20:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
about Ed Robertson
I don't know why he got so much exposure here, but his claims are (1) nothing new and (2) debatable. Nothing new, because the core of his article is a proposition of the same ideas exposed by the Russians (which may be or may be not valid, that's not the point); debatable, because that article seems to struggle hard to discredit other hypotheses, using controversial claims like:
Etruscan Chechen phersu "mask (of an animal)" borz "wolf" tul "stone" t.ul(-g) "stone"
- The translation "mask (of an animal)" seems suspicious to me, only to make the fit better. As far as I am aware, phersu is simply a mask, as used in plays and perhaps religious rituals – though keeping in mind this paper, even that general meaning appears to be purely conjectural and derived from a small number of paintings that name a character phersu, but in any case nothing supports the specification "of an animal" at all. Worse, it is usually thought of as a loan from Greek πρόσωπον, which is everything but implausible (and much less far-fetched). So this (general unwillingness to exclude potential loanwords?) does not bode well. Robertson makes a huge leap of faith here, which, especially with a poorly-understood language like Etruscan, is inexcusable (and much more reprehensible than sloppiness). Or, to phrase it less politely, I suspect he's simply making stuff up, or talking out of his ass.
- Vajda's scholarship, whatever one may think of his hypothesis, seems to be incomparably better. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:43, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
The etruscan word for "gift" ,etc
" Etr. -(a)cvil, Raet. akvil, "gift";"
As far i know from Pyrgi tablets, the word for a gift, "to give" in Etruscan was "TUR" and not "akvil" ; and "a(k)vil"(avilχva) means "year", "yearly"... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrgi_Tablets What are the sources for those weird claims?
- Probably Rix and Schumacher (both 1998), as these sources specifically address the comparison of Raetic with Etruscan. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:48, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
- Plus, the hyphen indicates it's not a stand-alone word in Etruscan. Maybe an element of a compound. — kwami (talk) 01:15, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tyrsenian languages. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nostratic.ru/books/(329)EGRWND.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at
You may set the
|checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting
|needhelp= to your help request.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
If you are unable to use these tools, you may set
|needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.