[Mamzelle]

re: Linguistics is a sound rigorouse and valuable field of study. )))

Yeah, and we definitely need more study of grammar!

The linguists' chief claim to fame is the discovery that the Gypsies were of Indic (Sanscrit) origin. Before that, their origins were a mystery.

And it looks like transformational grammar may be helpful in developing, or at least analyzing, computer language.

Other than that, it's an interesting but not terribly important field. No social science can really call itself "rigorous"...

[AndyJackson]

I am a physcist with degrees from the top 10. I view linguistics as a sound objective field of inquiry. Linguists pose valid hypotheses which are capable of proof through the assembly and analysis of empirical data. And I think it is a lot more rigorous than the social sciences. For instance, grammar within a particular language and melieu is pretty much fixed, varying little from person to person. Except among the ill-educated, for instance, there is little statistical about the rule of subject-verb agreement as to number and person.

Among your arguments you have resorted to putting words in the mouths of others and then beating them over the head for it - a cheap liberal trick. You have resorted to namecalling - another cheap liberal trick. And you have smeared them with false facts - another cheap liberal trick.

I find the question of how the structure of language reflects the organization of the brain to be a fascinating endeavour. I would hope that you do to - or are you one who has no curiosity about the world?