Re: [tied] Anatolian

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "mkelkar2003" <smykelkar@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps a biological analogy will help: "warm-blooded animals" is a
> > polyphyletic grouping that includes mammals (Mammalia) and birds
> (Aves).
> > Both of the latter seem to be well-defined natural taxa (clades),

which

> > means, among other things, that each grouping has developed from a
> > single ancestral species, and that each contains all the

descendants of

> > such a common ancestor. But there was no "proto-warm-blooded animal"
> > since the most recent common ancestor of Mammalia and Aves was also
> > ancestral to many other groups (e.g. crocodylians, pterosaurs,

lizards,

> > snakes -- in fact, all known amniotes with the possible exception of
> > turtles, according to some phylogenetic analyses). And the common
> > ancestor wasn't even warm-blooded itself: endothermy developed
> > independently in two different lineages of its descendants.
> >
> > Piotr
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyphyletic
>
> "Scientific classification aims to group species together such that
> every group is descended from a single common ancestor, and the
> elimination of groups that are found to be polyphyletic is therefore a
> common goal, and is often the stimulus for major revisions of the
> classification schemes. A polyphyletic group can be "fixed" either by
> excluding clades or by adding the common ancestor."
>
> Are the Indo-European linguists making any efforts to "fix" their
> trees? For example following studies suggest that one could obtain
> much cleaner trees by eliminating Germanic and moving around the
> position of Albanian.
>
> Fig 4:
> http://www.stat.berkeley.edu/users/evans/659.pdf
>
> pages 31-34
> "The most we can say is that Albanian cannot occupy a position higher
> in the tree than in Fig 8..(p. 37)
> http://www.cs.rice.edu/~nakhleh/CPHL/RWT02.pdf
>
>
> Fig 5, Fig 10
> http://www.cs.rice.edu/~nakhleh/Papers/81.2nakhleh.pdf
>
> Notably, IIr and Anatolian branch do not have any contact edges but
> serveral European branches do.
>
> M. Kelkar

One can tell Germanic is going to be problematic by just looking at
their illustration (Fig 5). IIr *zhastas and PGmc *handuz sound so
similar. It is not perfect phylogeny. There is a contact edge here.
Pada/foot vata/wara/wind. No one wonder I have mastered English so
easily.

Looking at their original tree Fig 7 I counted 5 CONTINUOUS nodes to
IIr from the root. MORE THAN ANY OTHER BRANCH. What that means is the
"PIE homeland" was in the Indian Subcontinent. They could to have
moved the shortest distance to preserver such continuity.

Fig 8: If Germanic is removed then IIr and Balto Slavic share direct
descent.

http://www.cs.rice.edu/~nakhleh/CPHL/RWT02.pdf

Intersting! Reminds me of a comment from Burrows.

Thomas Burrow, The Sanskrit Language, London, Faber & Faber, 1955
(1973 3rd), p.11:

<http://www.continuitas.com/predecessors.html>

"We have already remarked on the deep divergences between the various
European members of the family, and this can only be accounted for by
pushing back the period of original division to a period much earlier
than is usually assumed»."

M. Kelkar