Re: * Re: Push (3)

--- On Tue, 1/20/09, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:

> <fournet.arnaud@ wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
>
> Germanic (and Hungarian) are fairly exceptional,
> They are the only clear cases of Western Siberian people
> succeeding in
> establishing in Europe.
>
> GK: The Magyar trek is historically well documented. We
> have nothing comparable for the absurd "theory" of
> Germanic (and only Germanic) moving from West Siberia to
> Europe. If the notion that Siberian peoples contributed
> words to the Germanic lexicon is not a figment of
> Fournet's uncontrollable imagination, it would further
> need to be convincingly shown that these words did not
> originate from a substrate population which moved in from
> the east before the IE arrived to absorb it.I shan't be
> holding my breath onthat one (:=)))

I think the Turks and related groups would be slighted by not being included. The Cumans, Pechenegs, et al, had a good run.
The Alans/Sarmtians/ Ossetes didn't do too bad and they're still in Europe.

If you accept some views of IE-Ur-Sprache, the Indo-Europeans didn't do a bad job in moving into Europe from Siberia/W. Central Asia

****GK: You mean the Ossetians? That's never been an issue. Whether the IEs spent some time in S/WCA before splitting into distinguishable groups is. And the singling out of Germanics as constituting themselves there even more so. I don't see Fournet as producing even the faint beginning of a proof here.****