Jotamar I think that your arguments have become very poor after I showed what kind of scholars are members of the RACV The true Scotsman paradox is based on the fact that no one can define what a true Scotsman is but it is very clear what a scholar is and in which fields a scholar is specialised so I don t see in which way the true Scotsman paradox can apply here If you are speaking of say biology you can give the opinion of experts in biology but I don t imagine anyone giving the opinion of a Nobel prize in economy for a discussion on biology When someone refers to the opinion of scholars when talking of a certain topic it is very clear that scholars specialised in that topic are referred to so in an article on a language as this one I find a real nonsense to mention the opinion of scholars in fields totally unrelated to linguistics I would make the change I did at the beginning just to delete the statement saying that a minority of scholars support the RACV these s This is an article about a language and the opinion of scholars with no relation to linguistics shouldn t be considered here so if we stick to linguists there is NO scholar who supports the RACV these s