Geoff:
>http://www-oi.uchicago.edu/OI/AR/95-96/95-96_Ind_Soysal.html
>
>I'm trying to find some other web references on this. I will post
>them as I find them.
No, no, Geoff! Listen! The Kaskian and the Hattic are two different
peoples! I've already found a small Hattic glossary at the library,
hence one of my own webpages that I've provided for online use:
http://glen_gordon.tripod.com/LANGUAGE/SINODENE/ABADHA/hattic_glossary.html
I'm talking about KASKIAN glossaries which as far as I'm aware do not exist
for the very reason that Kaskian was never written. They were nomadic
people. Any words in Kaskian would by nature be hypothetical, but even then,
on what basis would they be reconstructed?
So again, I ask, how does one conclude that Kaskian is a language related
to Hattic or NWC based on any linguistic data? Why must the language of
the Kaskians be part of this grouping?
- gLeN
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com