Talk:Amerind languages/to do


 * Use INLINE CITATIONS to make clear who claims what.
 * Good. This has been achieved - partially. We could use the ref tags. I'll do that as soon as I've got some time.
 * I am going to refine the references as soon as I am less busy.
 * Also, links to other articles (on both various subjects and persons mentioned) should be made.


 * Add some information on the m/t (a correction: n/m) pronominal pattern and the boy/girl/child isogloss.
 * Are these two arguments valid? Why?
 * Here, we should add that some linguists attribute the patterns to non-genetic causes.
 * Done.
 * We should mention that some linguists claim the pattern is (a) not confined to the Americas, (b) that wide-spread in Americas


 * Describe what lead Greenberg and his followers to postulate and advocate this theory.
 * Oh, and we should not forget the predecessors, like Sapir etc.


 * Describe what leads the majority of linguists to reject the hypothesis.
 * That is mentioned. Fine.


 * Correct mistakes:
 * Amerind is not at the same level as Na-Dene or Eskimo-Aleut. It goes into a bigger time-depth.
 * Exemplify the transcriptional and other mistakes in Greenbergs hypothesis.