From: Anne Lambert
Message: 14842
Date: 2002-08-30
>From: Piotr Gasiorowski <piotr.gasiorowski@...>Thanks, Piotr.
>Reply-To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
>To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [tied] Re: lat. barbatus
>Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:16:06 +0200
>
>If we knew for sure the family would already be called Indo-Tyrrhenian. I'd
>put it as follows: as non-IE languages go, Etruscan is one of the most
>promising candidates for a genetic relationship with IE. The main problem
>is that our knowledge of Etruscan is very imperfect. There are not enough
>Etruscan words with well-established meanings to test the regularity of
>sound correspondences. It's also a pity that Etruscan is virtually an
>isolate. Apart from the "Etruscoid" language of the Lemnos Stele (just a
>few sentences) and some very enigmatic languages known from short
>inscriptions, like Rhaetic of Camunic, which are difficult to relate to
>anything, the Tyrrhenian part of the hypothetical superfamily is
>represented by a single language, or rather its disiecta membra.
>
>Piotr
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Anne Lambert
>To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 10:00 PM
>Subject: Re: [tied] Re: lat. barbatus
>
>
>Dear List,
>To whomever: I asked a few weeks ago how (if at all) Etruscan is related to
>IE, but got no answer. I'm still curious. Thank you, Anne
>
>