Re: [tied] Re: Dating PIE

From: george knysh
Message: 10409
Date: 2001-10-18

--- Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <mcv@...> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2001 18:14:26 -0000, "S.Kalyanaraman"
> <kalyan97@...> wrote:
> >For an alternative view on the Homeland and the
> Chronology problem by
> >another linguist, here are Aron Doglopolsky's
> views.
> >
> (MCV):
> Actually, this is not really an _alternative_ view.
> Piotr and myself
> have argued against Mallory's "horse-wheeled
> vehicle" argument in much
> the same way as Dolgopolsky does here, so (speaking
> for myself)
> there's no disagreement there.

*****GK: May I ask a question here (which is actually
related to my previous question concerning non-IE
elements in IE languages)? If Anatolian IE languages
do not share words re "wheel" "vehicle" and "horse"
with other IE languages, what is the source for their
words as to these (for I assume that Hittite etc. do
have words for "wheel" "vehicle" and "horse" do they
not?). And a follow up: if Mallory (citing someone
whose name escapes me for the moment==I left his book
at the dacha (:=))====) claims that perhaps as much as
50% if not more of Hittite vocabulary is non-IE then
are far-flung conclusions here not a bit chancy? What
guarantee do we have that the "Hittites" when they
moved into "the land of Hatti" were not subjected to
enormous cultural pressure from the locals, which led
to the abandonment of many IE words in the eventual
hybrid language developing from this interplay? I
suppose, as a logician rather than a linguist, that
the archaic nature of the Hittite IE word baggage can
otherwise be most useful for cautious genetic
reconstructions, but is one entitled to assume that
non-presence of an expected word in their language is
proof that it was never there? Mind you this argument
has significance to the extent that the % cited above
is in effect accurate or close.******
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com