[tied] Re: Proto Vedic Continuity Theory of Bharatiya (Indian) Lang

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham"
<richard.wordingham@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "mkelkar2003" <smykelkar@...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
> > It seems irrational to impose of our theories on people who lived
> > thousands of years ago without regards what those people have to say
> > about themselves.
>
> The problem is that people's beliefs about their origins are
> unreliable, as in the following example:

The Rig Veda does not even say that the composers are indigenous and
it does not even say that the composers are foreign.

> > The
> > > Scythian Foundation Legend in Herodotus likewise
> > > presents the Scythians as autochtons (some 200 years
> > > only after their arrival!), but we know this is not
> > > true.*****
>
> > > > > > > > > GK: So "genetic evidence" as you
> > > > understand
> > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > contradicts the verifiable "flow of
> > > > humans"
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > north into the Indian subcontinent in
> > > > > > historical
> > > > > > > > > times?...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > That it DEFINITELY does.
> > >
> > > ****GK: Since you claim that there is no genetic
> > > evidence of the Saka, Kushan, and Turco-Mongol
> > > invasions et sim., all of which clearly occurred, you
> > > cannot argue that the lack of genetic evidence for an
> > > Indo-Aryan invasion "proves" that such an invasion did
> > > not occur. This is elementary logic.*****
> >
> > I missed the last part of your sentence "historical times." You
> > were trying to trick me it seems. I am not aware of any studies that
> > have tried to track down genetic evidence of these because THERE IS
> > SIMPLY NO NEED FOR IT.
>
> Yes, there is.

yes there is a need for such studies. And perhaps they may not show
genetic evidence for the invaders may have been absorbed in the much
larger population.

You argue that the lack of genetic evidence of

> immigration implies that there was no such immigration. But this is
> only valid if such an immigration would have left evidence. So, if
> these invasions left evidence, then there does not seem to have been a
> significant immigration of alien IE speakers.

As long as we are drawing parallels these known invasions have not
caused a kind of linguistic change required by the IE theories.


If they did not leave

> discernible evidence, then the lack of evidence of a significant
> immigration of alien IE speakers is not evidence that it did not occur.

Argument from silence! If there is a lack of evidence for something
then on what basis can one assume that such events occurred at all?
One can argue that martians brought the IE langauges without leaving
genetic evidence. There is no way to refute them unless one figures
out WHO brought the IE languages. And that is the task for IEL which
they have not succeded at even after 200 years.

> On the other hand, there does seem to be evidence of genetic spread of
> Y chromosomes from the NW of India. This may be evidence of the
> spread of self-styled 'Aryans' - but I do not think it shows that they
> originated from outside India.
>
> I don't believe George Knysh tried to trick you - it came across as a
> genuine question along the line of reasoning I presented above. Note
> the use of the word 'verifiable'!
>
> Richard.
>
> > But here is the point. IEL migrations are
> > only acceptable if corroborated by other outside evdience.
>
> Someone has to have spread the language around. The nearest I can
> think of to a language spreading but no-one moving is the spread of
> religious languages - but priests (or whatever) have usually moved in
> these cases as well, albeit it in tiny numbers.
>
> Richard.

Agree. Languages have to be spread by people. Bantu and AmeriInd
langauge families can be clearly idenfied with a group of people. And
that is where the problem is. No such people who spread the IE
languages can be identified. In that case the only way out is to
rethink the whole idea of an "IE language" family, as shocking as it
may sound. The studies we have linked to on p. 16 and p. 51 of
proto-vedic-continuity theory.doc are we think a step in that direction.

M. Kelkar