Re: [tied] Why IE is NOT "a Steppe Language"

From: Glen Gordon
Message: 13570
Date: 2002-04-29

Steve misunderstands either accidentally or on purpose:
>Glen, you specifically asked for "IndoEuropean OR any Steppe
>language to be found in Anatolia when writing first begins."

You must be purposely twisting what I mean to avoid accepting
the facts. The fact is that, yes, Hittite is one of the first
recorded languages in Anatolia but, no, Anatolian languages are
mentioned only very late by neighbouring writing systems.
It's clear to most IEists that the Anatolian languages are not
indigenous to the area for so many reasons, culturally,
historically and linguistically. How does Hattic fit into this
bizarre scheme if it is not the more autochthonous language?


Steve quotes me (and I can only feel that I've been misunderstood
yet again but I'll remain patient):
><<Writing is the only way to _directly_ show that a language is
> present. Archaeology on the other hand can only hint at the
> linguistic state of affairs.>>
>
>When is the earliest written evidence of a Uralic language on the
>steppes or otherwise? When is the earliest written evidence of
>Altaic langauge on the steppes or otherwise? [blah, blah, blah]

This line of inquery is irrelevant because you have mistakingly
assumed that I consider writing as the *only* evidence of the
presence of language. This is false. It is the *only DIRECT*
(aka: the *only physical*) evidence of the presence of a language.

I will repeat and clarify: Writing is direct evidence of the
presence of a language and archaeology is nothing more than a
guide. However, comparative linguistics can shed light on the
matter when writing is absent.

So, concerning the Steppes, writing is nowhere to be seen either
there or in neighbouring regions until a date much, much later
than Proto-Uralic or Proto-Altaic. Without writing during this
time period, we must rely primilarily on comparative linguistics
to answer our questions about the position of Uralic or Altaic.

In the case of Anatolia, there *is* writing present in the Fertile
Crescent in both the Sumerian and Akkadian languages during the
time period we are discussing. It is in use for a good millenia
before the establishment of the Old Hittite Kingdom. Why is there
no hint of an IndoEuropean people in Anatolia until the beginning
of the second millenium BCE if they had been there all along?


- love gLeN


_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com