Glen
> Yes. The Kartvelians came up from the south. So they were NWC in origin,
> but that still doesn't connect anything with Kaskians.
No, the link between NW Caucasian (Adygo-Abkaz) and S. Caucasian
(Kartvelian) is held by specialists to be no longer sound, though undoubtedly
these ethnic groups have lived in close contact with each other for at least
3-4 millennia. There is a stronger link between NW and NE Caucasian
(Nakho-Dagestanian.) Kartvelian is now thought to have evolved from a
'melange' of tribes primarily in the Kura (Mtkvari) Valley, with
Svan having separated from the rest of the S Caucasian group in the
2nd-1st millenium BC.
It has always been my understanding that, among linguists of all specia-
lisms, hydronyms and toponyms provide in most cases sound evidence of
ancient occupation of the land pretty much wherever you look in the world.
(Does that hold in the case of Amerindian languges, for example?)
If I recall correctly - and I have not re-read any of her works for a number
of years - Marija Gimbutas has a lot to say about toponymic and hydro-
nymic evidence. This topic must have come up somewhere in earlier
discussions within the group at some point, but I have not yet found
an opportunity to search for it.
If not, I think we have a starting point for a new thread!
I had a look at your web-site yesterday - some very interesting ideas
there. I know very little about the Nostratic argument, because I am
not a comparative linguist or by training.
I will probably add to this reply when I have mulled things over!
Geoff