Re: Agriculture and IE

George wrote:
<<If there ever was a unified PIE (we have
theoretical reconstructions which is an entirely
different matter), how far back in time must one go to
find it, and what processes must one postulate for its
differentiation?... But perhaps a "hybridization" process
might, viz., one that envisages speakers of IE coming
into contact with a variety of pre-IE languages, whose
influence would be great enough to explain the
emergence of distinct early families relatively
quickly.>>

But the differentiation that comparative linguists would talk about would be
within the confines of IE's "genetic" development. (Correct me if I'm wrong,
Piotr.) In other words, the core question about distance between languages
that have branched off from a common ancestor is in theory answered by
features that demonstrate relatedness. The UPenn cladistic IE tree is an
example of this. The idea is that you can't track degree of differentation
by comparing borrowings, for obvious reasons.

The idea that *PIE in some form was fundamentally a real language is almost
mandatory if you are going to take the position that language history is at
all traceable - there really is no alternative to comparative linguistics to
make any sense out of it. But I don't think that the existence of *PIE means
that the history of IE languages must start there out of nothingness or an
internally reconstructed single sound. One does HAVE to start with the
premise however that IE languages did not start popping up independently all
over the place.

There has to be some unitary element of spreading if our concept of language
relatedness is going to be rationale. The problem of throwbacks and
back-and-forths and areals and early IE with early IE substrates all
complicate tracing the process. But its not really the origin point but the
spread that makes any of this relevant. And the spread does seem to need
some kind of unitary explanation.

Peter mentioned a value system, but I can only see one common, observable and
differentiatable value system arising in that area at that time. And that was
the change in "values" that converted people from the lifestyle of eating
wild things to raising their food themselves. When what you are going to eat
tomorrow is the most important thing on your mind, this kind of transition
changes the way you live your life. It should change everything from your
personal economics to your religion.

It's an accident of history that we know history through the eyes of kings
and armies. I agree with those who think History itself is more modest,
living day to day, eating three melas a day, staying out of the rain, making
a living. And that is where I'd see the big changes really starting.

Steve