6 797 comparative method n ary comparison gotcha two separate fallacies argument nary comparison discussed recently powers delancey guy apparently seeking defend 1 janhunen says probability match occurring purely chance compare japanese four languages four times compare one language simply true probabilities values 0 1 probablity case binary comparison say 5 would predicting would 2 case nary comparison impossible 2 0 1 2 fallacy purely mathematical although suspect involves elements confusio case one argues nary comparison ever talks getting match 2 n languages look guy numbers scenario 100 word list shifted meanings came 14 5 probable spurious mathces binary comparison 5 8 looking match 3 5 languages 0 13 look one 4 5 give much smaller number yet case 5 5 sure jacques defines spurious verified numbers certainly right orders magnitude consider languages also initial probability match declines usually happens go toy models real data happens need fewer fewer n languages compared agree thus guy example match n 2 languages 5 less likely occur chance one 2 2 n 100 e comparing 100 languages would need n 2 e 98 languages agree able better binary comparison would many many fewer although nt know many since know formula jacques using assuming initial probability match maybe could kindly supply numbers light let us add another argument rejecting indo european bopp never offered mathematical demonstration relationships proposed unlikely due chance much less binary comparison every pair indo european languages think goes show unrealistic whole idea comparisons want least let us clear minimize false positives e matches due chance really reflective common origin well false negatives e failures find genuine historical connections second point arguments nary better alexis mr