Re: [tied] Why is PIE more centum than satem?

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 12249
Date: 2002-02-03

I think you misunderstand my chronology. I proposed several dates for _selected_ events in the huge family-tree of IE, focussing on the lineage leading down to Indo-Aryan, since that had been your request. If I date "Proto-non-Anatolian IE" to 6500 BP, this doesn't mean that I regard Hittite as exceptionally old or exceptionally archaic. As a known and recorded language it is more or less contemporaneous with Mycenaean Greek, and probably with the earliest Indo-Iranian languages, just as Peter pointed out. As a matter of fact, my chronology implies that most of the other IE branches must have existed in the second millennium BC. The early date of the Anatolian/non-Anatolian split only reflects my opinion that the Anatolian branch is more distantly related to the other branches of the family than they are related to one another. It does _not_ mean that Hittite must be more similar to PIE than any other language. All languages spoken at the same time are equally "old".
 
Piotr
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: kalyan97
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Why is PIE more centum than satem?

Is the suggested overlap consistent with the non-overlapping
chronology suggested by Piotr?

> 7600 BP --- PIE
> 6500 BP --- non-Anatolian IE
> 5000 BP --- Proto-Satem
> 4600 BP --- Proto-Indo-Iranian
> 4000 BP --- Proto-Indo-Aryan
> 3700-3200 BP --- Rigvedic Indo-Aryan
> 3200-2500 BP --- late Old Indo-Aryan
> 2500-900 BP --- Middle Indo-Aryan