Re: Implications of Bangani

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:

>
>
> --- stlatos <stlatos@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > As I was planning to discuss Bangani in relation
> > to (I believe) its
> > closest relatives like Khowar, Nuristani,
> > Burushaski, etc., I found this:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski"
> > <gpiotr@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Bangani is a Western Pahari language, closely
> > related to a number of
> > modern Indo-Aryan languages spoken in India, Nepal
> > and Pakistan. No
> > "centum language", dead or extant, has ever been
> > discovered in those
> > parts, but the substratal vocabulary apparently
> > borrowed from a centum
> > language and preserved in Bangani looks interesting.
> > As H.H. Hock
> > points out, both Tocharian and Greek can be ruled
> > out as its sources,
> > so the tantalising possibility remains that there
> > were once upon a
> > time other "lost tribes" speaking non-Satem
> > varieties of IE.
> > >
> >
> > Is there any evidence that this is a substratum
> > within another
> > language instead of native words in a non-Indic,
> > non-Ir language that
> > was fairly heavily influenced by Indic recently?

> I think you may have only caught the front end of the
> string. As I remember, and as Wikipedia states, the
> Bangani data is controversial. I remember Piotr and
> other hashed that out a while back. Van Driem claims
> that Bangani is satem, through and through and that
> the centum data is flawed.

I've read everything relevant in the archives. Piotr and others
continued to claim the centum words came from another language into
Bangani, which is itself definitely Indic. No evidence was offered
for this view, and I'm giving an interpretation to argue against it.

This is completely separate form the dispute over whether the words
actually exist (or exist with such meanings) in the first place.