Re: The Hungarian Language: One of the true wonder of the Earth since ancient ti
etudiante said:
Thanks for the reply. Unfortunately, I can only use original research in my program. This excludes all Wikipedia entries but may include their externally linked original research work. In the case of the entry you mention, I found only links in which the authors either don't source their information, or rely on circular reference - where one author relies on her/his own unsupported (by original research) claims or on another author's equally unsupported claims.
"And linguistically speaking, the connection ... nailed down pretty tightly." This is where I need guidance to original research work (not popularized literature). Could you cite any?
Well, let me first say straight-out that the kind of research materials you can or cannot use in your program is really not germane to this thread -- best of luck in your research, but if you are here to try to use this thread to gather materials for your research project, that's not really what it is here for. That being said, I think that by limiting your materials to 'early or contemporary field work documentation on claims of such connection' (see quote below), you are going to really make it hard on yourself. If I take that literally, then you are looking for fieldwork that specifically tests the Finno-Ugric hypothesis; it may exist, but most often you are going to find published fieldwork on the one hand and phylogenetic analysis on the other.
etudiante said:
"Languages and genes don't always travel together as an exclusive bundle..." I don't believe I argued that point. Perhaps this is meant to be a rebuttal to an earlier post by go2 (Reply 12) who relies on blood type distribution to "support the linguistic evidence of a common origin." In this case, your observation actually undercuts claims of a linguistic connection.
No, by referencing mtDNA data in your earlier post, this does seem to be the point you were arguing -- if not, then you certainly left yourself open to that interpretation. The category this thread is posted under is 'Linguistics', and although not all of the discussion has been kept strictly under that umbrella, it is the main theme. And how is it that my observation about the lack of cohesion between linguistic and genetic signals undercuts the claim of a linguistic connection? All it does is say that the genetic evidence may not be congruent with the linguistic evidence (and vice versa).
etudiante said:
There's no shortage of verifiable documentation that convincingly refutes any previous claims of Hungarian-Finnish linguistic connection (e. g., Dr. László Marácz, Professor and Lecturer, Amsterdam University, The Untenability of the Finno-Ugric Theory from a Linguistic Point of View: Selected Studies in Hungarian History, 2008, pp. 547-558 and 926-7).
Well, that's quite subjective -- if you have been doing research in this area very long, you will no doubt realize that there is quite a difference between one scholar and the next of what constitutes 'verifiable', and without seeing a list, its hard to ascertain how abundant this material may actually be. I would be interested at some point in taking a look at the reference you cite above -- its germane to my professional life, although not necessarily to this thread.
etudiante said:
But I what I need is original research, i. e., early or contemporary field work documentation on claims of such connection. If you know of any, kindly post the info here.
See my response above in regard to the kind of materials that you have limited yourself to. What I can give you are a few solid references on Uralic, in which Hungarian is included in the comparanda and classification:
Collinder, Bjorn. 1955.
Fenno-Ugric Vocabulary. An Etymological Dictionary of the Uralic Languages. Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksells.
Decsy, Gyula. 1990.
The Uralic Protolanguage: A Comprehensive Reconstruction. Bloomington, IN: Eurolingua.
Redei, Karoly (ed.). 1986-88.
Uralisches etymologisches Worterbuch [Uralic Etymological Dictionary]. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz
You may do with these as you will -- if you are really interested in the classification of Hungarian, I think you would be wise to consult these works alongside of whatever contemporary fieldwork you are able to find. There is more available than this, but based on your introductory post you seem to be well-placed in an environment to do your own research and find your own resources.
All of this aside, I think there is a more important general question -- now that you have had time to browse the forum, what do you really hope to get out of it? The kind of exchange we have had here could be done more appropriately on a linguistic forum -- are you interested in anything here beyond the scope of your research project which led you here initially? Are you interested in the Cassiopaean transmissions, Fourth Way teaching, or in trying to distinguish objective reality from subjective reality? What we have been discussing is interesting in its own right, but these are really the core themes that underpin this forum -- with that in mind, is this a place that is appropriate for your personal goals?
Update: Even before posting this reply, I see that you have already bid us farewell. I will post this anyway for posterity (and you get some research references as a kicker -- its your lucky day!)