Richard:
>I've seen Syria or Palestine proposed, whereas the ancient theory has
>them coming from Yemen. I don't think Abraham's coming from Ur has
>much bearing on the matter, if that is what you are driving at.
I'm not driving at anything. I'm trying to underline the standard homeland
posited for Semitic, not alien saucers, Richard!
>What do you expect to see? Anatolian is basically the continuation
>of PIE in Anatolia. (I don't know what to make of Phrygian, though.)
Not basically. Hydronyms show a non-IE substrate in the area which
is later occupied by IEs. All evidence shows that Hattic are more
autochthonous than the Hittites. There are some archaeological
issues to deal with as well.
>I don't see the contradiction. Uralic and Japanese are widely
>separated, and you don't see Uralic as being any closer to IE than to
>Altaic.
Japanese isn't on a par with IndoEuropean chronologically so that's
an unfair statement. After 6000 years and an industrial revolution,
yeah, any language can zing across to the other side of the world,
for Asherah's sakes!
However, at 4000 BCE, Altaic would have been in Central Asia and
Uralic was up the Volga somewhere, and the related IndoEuropeans
and Tyrrhenians were the further west of this large superstock...
in Eastern Europe. Since they didn't have trains back then, you
find that language groups don't move very far from each other,
even after four or five thousand years.
>Anatolia makes the connections easier.
No, it makes it harder. That's why I suggested the IE coastal
fisherman idea because as absurd as that idea is, it's actually easier
to support than the Out-Of-Anatolia theory. This is why Ivanov
and Gamqrelidze's theories remain fringe camps.
>*bHebHru- does not have a thematic vowel! What are your examples
>of deverbal thematic nouns from reduplicated stems?
That's beside the point, Richard. The verb+*-o- formation is common
in IE on a whole (and *kWekWl-o- follows this pattern nonetheless),
regardless of what form the verb is in. We don't see many words with
lengthened *e in the stem and the *-r termination either. Does that
show necessarily that *ye:kW-r is a foreign word? No. It simply means
that that particular combination of features weren't as productive
as other combinations. When you have not one, but two specific
criteria in your etymon search, your chances of finding that pattern
are statistically less. Naturally.
The form *bHebHru- shows a reduplicated stem *bHe-bHr- just as
*kWekWlo- shows *kWe-kWl-. Both are native words. Likewise
*kWekWl-o- shows a pattern of [verb+thematic] just as *ni-sd-o-
does. Both are native words. There are few words with *o-stative,
unreduplicated, nonthematic stems like *wokW- "voice" too. What
does one expect when you're looking for a pattern so strict as
"a AND b AND c AND ..."?
= gLeN
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963