AMERICAN HISTORY ORG., UPDATE 1

.Drafted organization.

Proposed Six
   leader roles.

   Filled three.
       Scout leader
       American
            Leader
        International
            Leader

   Invited one more.

Ready for business.

.

ULTIMATE GOAL:

PROFESSORS IN MANY UNIVERSITIES SHOULD TEACH AMERICAN HISTORY.

.

.

OUR PARADIGM:

When the English invaded,

Most Americans spoke Norse.

.

FIRST ACTION
OHIO STATE LINGUISTS
.

A month ago, I sent the following letter to the Ohio State Linguists.

Hi, Linguistic faculty

.

I have a Ph. D. in Engineering.  I was listed in Who’s Who in Engineering (1967). 

Why are NOT those qualifications adequate to open a conversation with a DISTINGUISHED Linguistic professor at OHIO state?

.

Why has the Linguistic department suppressed the knowledge that the origin of the Algonquin Indian Language is OLD NORSE?

.

Do you want to be NEXT or LAST to publish the TRUE information about the A.merican Language?

.

Is the OHIO faculty teaching LENAPE HISTORY now?

.

If not, Your faculty can be NEXT — or LAST!

.

MYRON, @ LENAPE LAND

.

See Also:

WHEN the ENGLISH INVADED, 

MOST AMERICANS SPOKE NORSE. 

The monthly page views of my five blogs

. 

..

LENAPE LAND

PARADIGM SHIFT

LENAPE LEARNING

LENAPE EPIC

WYNLAND of WEST

ARE EVIDENCE THAT PROFESSORS PEEK AT POSTS BUT DO NOT REPLY.

.

BUT, IN FACT, AFTER ANOTHER POKE, ONE linguist 

 professor  from Ohio state university DID reply.  Here is his Email:

On Nov 11, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Joseph, Brian <joseph.1@osu.edu> wrote:

.

The “evidence" that purportedly links Algonquin with Norse does not measure up to the scientific standards of historical linguistics, so there is nothing to remark upon.  See the review of Sherwin’s book that was written by Albert M. Sturtevant, a fine historical linguist with impeccable scientific credentials, especially as far as Old Norse is concerned, in Scandinavian Studies vol. 16 (1940), pp. 114-116.  Sturtevant makes it clear that there is no basis grounded in sound historical linguistic methodology for Sherwin’s clai.ms.

.

Brian D. Joseph

Distinguished University Professor of Linguistics  

The Ohio State University

.

Here is my reply:

.

.Thanks, Brian.

.

For opening the discussion.

.

I will try to find Albert M. Sturtevant’s review of Reider T. Sherwin’s book.

.

Sturtevant’s review was written in 1940, which was when Sherwin’s FIRST volume was published.  

Sherwin, himself, waited until the forward of the fourth volume before he would write, “the Algonquin Indian language is Old Norse. … The truth cannot be successfully attacked."

.

.

Sherwin added more than 6,000 Algonquin=Norse comparisons by 1946.

.

So we have a difference of opinion.  There IS a basis in sound historical linguistic methodology for Sherwin’s claims.

Those 6,000 additional words Sherwin added by 1946 plus the 7,000 Algonquin 

     =Norse words Sherwin added in the following four volumes up to 1956 MUST be examined.

.

I contend that "scientific standards of historical linguistics” cannot be fulfilled on the basis of only one review of only the first 2,000 Algonquin 

=Norse comparisons of a 15,000 thousand words data set.

.

I will send you reasons why others who studied Sherwin’s  words have concluded there is a historical basis for Sherwin’s claims.

.

I appreciate the discussion. 

.

MYRON, @ LENAPE LAND

. 

American History Org. is on the path.

Have a good one.