--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti" <frabrig@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> << 6.3. THE NON-INVASIONIST MODEL
>
> The emerging alternative to the Aryan Invasion Theory may be
> summarized as follows. In the 6th millennium BC, the Proto-Indo-
> Europeans were living in what is now Panjab, Haryana and western
> Uttar Pradesh, speaking a variety of mutually comprehensible
> dialects, and tending cattle as well as practising agriculture.
>
> The group which separated
> earliest from the rest was the one which took the oldest form of the
> IE language along: we encounter them by 2,000 BC in Anatolia.
>
> >
> This model will certainly need amendments and corrections, but it is
> better able to explain the data than the dominant Kurgan-to-India
> invasionist model. >>
>
So in effect you are a supporter of the idea of NW India being the
urheimat of PIE? What proportion of linguists, archaeologists, and
geneticists agree with you? Should I now change my belief in the
central-to-west/central-to-east migration theories which I basically
took for granted since they have been the only ones that have been
published, as far as I know? Also, according to this theory, which
are more original, centum or satem; if the centum velars are the more
original sounds, why did all languages nearest to the urheimat
(excluding Tocharian) participate in a shift velar>palatal; if the
satem palatals are more original, why did all the most western
languages participate in a shift palatal>velar, which I personally
find rather implausible? Isn't it easier to suggest that the velars
are the more original, and in like fashion the original homeland was
(much) nearer than India to those languages that had the velars rather
than the palatals?
Andrew