The Preposterous Altaic Controversy, or the Failure of Empiricism and Growth of Faith-Based Dogmatism in Modern Linguistics

Polar Bear: Interesting how North Chinese Mongol types made it down to Korea.

Yes, and keep in mind that that same group on the shores of Shandong Peninsula also became the Japanese. They were together as some sort of Proto-Japanese-Koreans as early as 8,000 YBP. That finding is controversial though because it is based on Altaic Theory and a paper by noted Altaicist Martine Robeets of the Max Plank Institute in Switzerland.

Although Altaic is as obvious a language family as Algonquian, for some reason, a group of fanatics have attacked the idea and have now turned it into the “crazy theory.”

However, I did a recent survey of Altaic linguists, and 7

General Linguistics despises Altaic Theory, it is now an ojbect of ridicule, and if you believe in Altaic you are regarded as a super-kook. I think most linguists are just going along with the fanatics due to peer pressure. Peer pressure is extreme in my field. It’s as bad an 8th grade playground, especially when they are under the cover of anonymity like the losers on the Bad Linguistics Reddit. They’re such cowards that they won’t even tell us their names.

I think the peer pressure and bullying of the erudite by the ignorant obscurantists has gotten so bad that if you said you believed in Altaic, you might have a hard time getting hired at a university nowadays.

Anti-Altaic fanaticism has come out of the US. This is unfortunate and it is because the US is the center of the linguistic scholarly universe. US linguists act as arrogant American exceptionalist “linguistic imperialists of the US hegemon” in the same way that US politics revolves around the arrogant American exceptionalist Deep State theorists promoting the US Empire and the US as the hegemon or dictator of the world.

That most of these linguists are actually on the Left while spouting the worst conservatism and reaction is even more pathetic, but it makes sense if one sees the modern Cultural Left as actually a backwards, reactionary, throwback movement.

As an example, the Cultural Left is now the Sex-Hating Left, the Victorian Left, the Comstockian Left, the Prude Left. Conservatives are more sex-positive than your average dour, sour-faced, turd-in-the-punchbowl, party-pooping Cultural Leftist.

Problem with this is that like American foreign policy know-it-all dimwits, US linguist know-it-all dimwits leading the charge against Altaic overwhelmingly know absolutely nothing whatsoever about Altaic Theory. They’re just going along with crowd, and following the bully-boys, throwing rocks and calling names at the designated victims, the Altaicists. Like I said above, it’s 8th grade all over again.

It’s pathetic, especially if you realize that these are grown men and not pubescent children engaging in such theatrics and over the top histrionics.

As an example, the Wikipedia article on Altaic has been completely ruined by these fanatics, and it stands now more as a monument to know-nothingism in the social sciences than to any sort of actual empiricism. It’s a sad day when we linguists join the rest of the social “science” crowd in their war against facts and truth in favor of ideology being led by ideologues masquerading as scientists.

One doesn’t know whether to laugh or cry.

As a result of this “virus pandemic” of ignorant anti-Altaicism coming out of the land of the free, a large majority of linguists reject Altaic Theory. I might point out that this stupidity virus didn’t spread too far across the pond.

European linguists still generally believe in Altaic, though most don’t know it well. I have seen these poor sods wander into linguistic debates shaking their heads wondering why the Hell Altaic is even controversial at all, when it’s really about as easily proven as Uto-Aztecan. They’re dumbfounded.

So this ignorance epidemic is a lot less contagious than we first feared. The anti-Altaic virus is not particularly harmful for those who catch it. The coarse is mild but very long-lasting. The only notable symptom is being reduced to drooling, screeching, straitjacket cases whenever the word Altaic is mentioned. The prognosis is good, but some might be cooking a heart attack or stroke if they don’t calm down soon.

Please note though that my research has proven that among those who specialize in Altaic,  the overwhelming majority (7

Please follow and like us:

15 thoughts on “The Preposterous Altaic Controversy, or the Failure of Empiricism and Growth of Faith-Based Dogmatism in Modern Linguistics”

  1. Hmm, I always wondered if a Turkish speaker would find learning Korean or Japanese easy or vice versa. I guess that would be the best outcome of the Altaic Theory, with all of the languages at least being agglutinative.

  2. 15 years ago in a US university I took an Intro to Japanese Linguistics class. The professors was a female ethnic Japanese and a Japanese linguistics and language teacher. This was the book edition:

    The professor, who is probably a leftist turd, asked the class if we thought Japanese was related to Korean or Altaic based on what we had learned. The Altaic hypothesis depends on the related language NOT having rhotic (R or L-like for the uninitiated) initial consonants. The Japanese professor said Japanese is riddled with words that begin with R.

    I swiftly pointed out that almost every single R-initials morpheme, was a historical Chinese or recent foreign language loanword.

    She countered with that fact that her name started with an ‘r’ and it is considered to be a native Japanese, non-loan word name. If her claim about her name being native is even true, something I doubt, it’s a tiny exception to the rule.

    This doesn’t nullify the fact that upwards of 99% of Japanese words r-initial words are loan word. Nor did she account for the fact that some loanwords are often reanalyzed by speakers to be “native.” Nor does account for native speakers learning how to make r-initial word after the massive borrowing forever changing their phontotactics. I believe Korean is also 99% r-initial loanword language.

    -Claudius Altais

  3. They hate Altaic or Greenberg’s mass-comparison for the same reason they hate the concept of race. The Cultural Left has redefined high entropy to equal virtue and low entropy to equal evil.

    When the virtuous outcome is high entropy such as:

      The non-existence of race.

      The non-existence of macro-families.

      No personal responsibility and drug use.

      Hormones and sex-reassignment surgery and becoming a tranny…

    …it’s impossible to be evil.

    Post-modernism ISN’T AN ELITIST MOVEMENT, it’s a very populist one at it’s core.

    It’s easier to do the above than to do the below, which if you suggest you’re a mad-scientist or a bigot:

      Defend the genetic evidence of race.

      Defend the linguistic evidence of macro-families.

      Do to rehab and resist temptation.

      Go to therapy and stop being so AIDS-spreading promiscuous…

    where becoming good by oneself is damn-near impossible. This is why Christians need Jesus and Hindus require multiple reincarnations to get it right!

    -Claudius Altais

  4. I remember from my elementary Catholic school days how we all hated religious education and thought it was boring and uncool. I don’t think a single one of us is a devout Christian decades later. Yet the majority of us have become leftists and socialists, even some who didn’t go to college. What does that say about the populist appeal of Cultural Leftism versus rightism?

    Sorry Karl, but religion ain’t the opium of the masses. It’s too demanding and frightening. Let’s just never accept mass comparison. That way we never have to use the comparative method on the resulting potential groupings! That’s hard work. This way we can pretend to support the latter method in favor of the former when in reality we’d rather do neither!

    1. Hi, please don’t attack socialism, liberalism, or the Left in general. This site is supposed to be for liberals and Leftists who hate the Cultural Left. We support the rest of the Left though. You have to support at least Keynesian economics with a safety net at a minimum. If not, please just be quiet about it. I ban people for supporting rightwing economics on here.

      This site promotes a new movement called the Alternative Left or the Alt Left. It started out as a leftwing split from the Alt Right but then it went beyond that spawned some new movements. I actually created this new movement LOL. It’s pretty small but at one point there were 18,000 members of Alt Left groups on Facebook.

      We even let in Nazbols, but I don’t know about Strasserites. I guess they can go form their own wing but the rest of us won’t support them. There definitely is a White Nationalist Alt Left faction, but it’s been disowned by most of the rest of the movement. Welcome aboard if you want to join.

      We are sort of like the Old Left pre-1964 in the US, or the Left in existing Communist countries which was actually socially conservative. We are basically left on economics and right on culture, but honestly we are in between the Cultural Left and the Republican social conservatives. Welcome aboard if you are interested.

      1. I’m actually a Republican Libertarian. Although that is a gross simplification of what I actual believe. As you can tell, I’m a race realist. That drives my politics more than arguing over the federal budget.

        The Alt Left and Slavoj Žižek are the only liberals I can tolerate. I disagree with the economics of course, but I support the movement as far as I think it’s good that you all exist as a collective opposition the the deranged Cultural Left.

        I have been reading your blog for a few years, so I am well aware of your general position. I won’t bash leftist economics on this forum. I will criticize them however if I feel it’s constructive. I’m not well versed in economics so I will rarely do so.

        My major interest in life are race, culture, linguistics, science, and computer science. I can discuss comp sci in other forums sanely because the Cult Left hasn’t corrupted it yet. They will soon. I’ll save that one for another day. Do expect Catholic and Commie jokes however.

        1. I don’t hang out with Libertarians because they are usually bat-shit insane, Neo-Nazis, or simply read Ayn Rand (who I actually like very much) and now think they know more than Alan Greenspan.

          What is it about Libertarianism specifically that attracts all the crazies? It’s anarchism without collective ownership. It’s absurdity is on par with other anarchisms.

          Rand wasn’t insane. She probably had an IQ of 160 basing it off her TV interviews.

          Rank-and-file Libertardians might just secretly be White-Power Commies who like guns but know that any socialist regime will disproportionately tax them and give to the niggers. Oh the humanity!

          What the flipping-burger is wrong with these people?

          I’m a Nordicist libertarian who hates other Nordicist libertarians. There, I said it.

        2. Of course you’re a rightwing Libertarian. 100% of WN types are exactly that, the Nordicists possibly more than the others, especially the US ones. And 99% of US self-proclaimed race realists are also rightwing Libertarians. The race realist or especially the WN Alt Left is quite a small movement centered around Brandon Adamson.

          1. American Renaissance has a good piece of the WN Left:

            I think many contemporary libertarians may have a historical origin with the pre-WW II liberals who were quite racist. Also, most smart people go to college where they receive left-wing indoctrination but are never exposed to alt-right ideas. The dummies who couldn’t get in join the libertarian ranks without understanding the ideology. They just feel at home with the other mean racists.

        3. I won’t bash Leftist economics on this forum. I will criticize them however if I feel it’s constructive.

          Criticize them within a socialist or liberal format. In other words, if they are messing something up, talk about how they could do it better while still being progressives or socialists.

          Market socialism as practiced by China and Bolivarianism as done in Venezuela (despite most of the economy being in capitalist hands) are both absolutely acceptable. So is the project of the former President of Bolivia, Ecuador under Correa, Argentina under Fernandez, the Sandinistas of course, and even the PT government in Brazil: those are all acceptable while there is plenty of capitalism in all of those places.

          I’m not that dogmatic. I’m just a socialist. I will even settle for social democracy, or Hell, even social liberalism and Keynesian economics with a safety net. The Left is a broad thing to me.

        4. The Alt Left and Slavoj Žižek are the only liberals I can tolerate.

          I think Andrew Anglin even said he could tolerate an Alt Left-type of Left opposition.

  5. Mexican and Overseas Chinks will take our low-IQ jobs. Then automation will take theirs. Natural Language Processing and computational linguistics will destroy linguists’ jobs. Greenberg’s criticism of the combinatorial explosion for attempting to use the comparative method on all potential internal sub-groupings will be rendered moot by computer programs.

    -Claudius Computor

  6. Boas, Sapir and Whorf where great because they were willing to get their hands dirty in the field, stare the savage Injun in the eye and not patronize or glorify their primitive ways. Turing (and accidental syntactician) and Loony-toon Lefty Chomsky became great because they knew math.

    I stopped going to linguistics talks or volunteering because everyone there was a fucking woman or beta male soyboy. No one there seemed man enough to learn math. I was afraid they would infect me with their faggot prions and give me Early-onset Faggot Dementia.

    I guess it’s more fun to tape-record Brown bastards around the world who speak polysynthetic-35-tone-morphosyntactic-catastrophy-gibberish or analyze a dialect of a colonial Indo-European language that the field linguist knew natively IN TERMS OF THE EASILY LEARNABLE STANDARD DIALECT rather than analyze the morphology properly or posit a known paradigm for the divergent colonial IE languages.

    Not a single linguist seems to have noticed that Spanish has become polypersonal and weakly noun-incorporating polysynthetic or has a split syntactical alignment.

    Español no es nominativo-acusativo, hermano.

    If a Catholic nun had beaten the Communist out of you and taught you Latin, you’d realize the IE case system is moribund in Western Romance, yes, even at the syntactical level.

    Spanish has Nominative, Animative**, Accusative, Dative, Genitive and Instrumental** cases.

  7. This is taking place online as I type:

    “Many previous studies have shown that non-linguistic information influences speech perception (Rubin 1992, Hay, Warren and Drager 2006), and one specific line of work in this area has shown that being shown a photograph of a person of a particular ethnic background affects listeners’ comprehension of their speech.”

    Lol. I’m sure the talk’s premise is true. But linguistics is becoming a tin-foil hat collective seeing oppression everywhere.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)