Re: Meaning of Aryan: now, "white people"?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti" <frabrig@...>
wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "mkelkar2003" <swatimkelkar@>
> wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti" <frabrig@>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 1. the early habitat of Proto-Indo-Iranians was in an area

close

> > > to the Central Asian steppe-taiga interface, e.g., near the
> > > Urals;
> > >
> > > 2. these Proto-Indo-Iranians called themselves *arya-.
> >
> > "Indo-Iranian" is a linguistic idea. It does not refer to any
> > actual people who can be traced back into history. See Lamberg-
> > Karlovsky 2005.pdf and Proto-Indo-European Reality and
> > reconstruction.pdf
>
>
> I've read for the nth timesince 2005 the conclusions of LK's paper
> linked to above, and this is, in short, what I think of his
> arguments:
>
> 1) The BMAC and the cultures of the Andronovo archaeol. horizon may
> have shared common ancestors: NO.
>
> 2) The BMAC people(s) may have been Indo-Iranian speakers: NO --

the

> languages of the BMAC, at least some of them, may have belonged to
> the Macro-Caucasian super-phylum as the present-day Burushos of
> Northern Pakistan.
>
> 3) Absence of Andronovo-type artifacts in Iran and NW South Asia
> versus presence of BMAC-type artifacts in the same areas (2nd mill.
> BCE): this can be explained if one accepts Mallory's Kulturkugel
> model.
>
> 4) The Andronovans and/or the BMAC folks may have spoken Dravidian
> and/or Altaic and/or Uralic languages: HARDLY SO!!
>
> 5) Trubetskoy's and Dixon's "innovative" models based on linguistic
> convergence, linguistic areas, and equilibrium versus the "old-
> fashioned" comparativist model based on linguistic divergence,
> family trees, and migrations: BULLSHIT!

Very scientific! Dixon's BULLSHIT! punctuality equilibrium model has
been validated in a recent Science magazine article
Evolution of language in punctual bursts."

Every one who does not agree with you is "aged"
(Dhavalikar), "compromised" and colored by "indiginist point of view"
Not everyone who supports the OIT model is of South Asian origin.

Lets continue this "scientific" dialgoue.

M. Kelkar

>
> 5) "Anti-migrationist" comparison between Henning's attempt to
> identify the Guti of ancient Mesopotamia with the Yuezhi of Chinese
> chronicles and the ongoing scholarly attempts to identify the
> Andronovans with the Indo-Iranians: MORE BULLSHIT!
>
> The truth is that, in spite of his claims, LK largely neglects
> linguistic evidence from 2nd mill. BCE Central Asia and the
> steppe/taiga belt of Eurasia. He, for instance, doesn't see the
> layering and distribution of the oldest Indo-Iranian languages and
> their overlap with Uralic, insisting on the idea that "language and
> archaeology do not corrlate" insted.
>
> Rehards,
> Francesco
>