DDeden Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > (The snipping has made the message a bit
> confusing to follow. What was the subject? Oh
> yeah, AE words..)


I'm sorry that you lost the subject in the message. It went like this:

You asked about AE words related to Latin roots.
Several of us pointed out that there wasn't a relationship (Latin came long after AE and the two languages aren't related) and that you might want to rethink your research and do some more reading to find out what's already known.
You came back with more relationships and said you were linking them to sounds and syllables made 10 million years ago and were looking for these sounds in the AE.
I said "Those sounds weren't used in that context ... and how do you know they were made 10 million years ago in that context?"
You provided some claims about ancient humans and the sounds they made.
I said "there weren't any humans 10 million years ago. How are you tracing language to proto-apes?"
You said "I'm confused."
I repeated my question - "you're saying language rose from humans 10 million years ago and have very specific (and modern) sounds and contexts that are carried throughout the world. What evidence are you using to prove this?"
You said "What was the subject?"

I hope this helps. As the others have pointed out, you seem to be researching starting with English and languages that rose within the past 2,000 years or so. There's a nice post here in the Hall that points out some of the problems of using Romance Languages as the basis for research into ancient languages:
[www.hallofmaat.com]