Uralic Continuity Theory (was: Meaning of Aryan: now, "white people"

From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 53508
Date: 2008-02-17

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
wrote:

[I'm allowing this through as a discussion of the Uralic Continuity Theory', not as a discussion of AIT/OIT, which has been reclosed. I've therefore taken the liberty of changing the subject title. - Richard.]

> At any rate, I believe I have shown enough possible ways to
> reasonably reconcile the lexical exchange between the eastern IE
> languages and Uralic with an Indian Urheimat scenario (Elst 2000)."
>
> M. Kelkar
> ==========
>
> It does not account for Mordvin vrgas being a Sanscrit word
> not an iranian word.
>
> We are not dealing with PIE / Uralic lexical exchanges.
> But specific languages to specific languages.
> This is why your approach is basically flawed.
>
> Arnaud
=============
There is a Uralic Continuity Theory which would elminate the need for
migrations of Uralic languages and by extention IE languages

M. K.
=============

The theory is highly dubious in the first place.
And can't account for Samoyedic and Ugric positions.
But I understand that your *absurd* claim for autochthonous
finds some support in another *absurd* claim that
Uralic comes from Ukraine.
This theory makes the same absurd reverse split order
as yours.
Finnish is the end of the tree not the start.

Arnaud
===========