Old Polish (geoffreycaveney's theory)

[geoffreycaveney]

Please note: There is a big difference between a Polish scholar saying that the totality of the output I produced does not make complete sense to him, which is understandable, and the claim that the output has no Polish or Slavic syntax or morphology whatsoever, which is a quite different claim made by Marco and not by the Polish scholar.

I'm afraid that the Polish scholar was much more clear than that.
How much evidence, advice can one completely ignore, and just keep on going?

It is reasonable that different scholars could have different opinions concerning the intelligibility of an obscure text written in an obscure script about obscure topics in a time period from which a very small number of written documents exist at all in the language in which the text may be written, perhaps in a different dialect. I respect and appreciate the scholar's opinion and evaluation of my interpretation, but I do not consider it to necessarily be the conclusive final word on the matter.

For the record, I am making my own efforts to reach out and request the opinions and feedback of West Slavic scholars as well. Now I do not wish to carry on a discussion by proxy on this forum between a scholar you have contacted and any scholars I may be in contact with. But I can make a very brief summary comment that I have at least received feedback that is not as summarily dismissive of my reading and interpretation as is that of the scholar whose comments you have cited. For example, one scholar has expressed a reaction along the lines that he has problems understanding certain complete sentences. Yes, this is also critical feedback, and I think it is a fair comment, and I appreciate it very much. But it is not nearly so summarily dismissive as a comment that the text of my interpretation simply makes no sense to him.