From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 18945
Date: 2003-02-20
----- Original Message -----
From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: "Will the 'real' linguist please stand up?"
> There are many reasons why a date around 6000 BP is by far more likely than 10500 BC.
I meant BP ("before present") in both cases (just quoting Dixon's dates). Sorry. Incidentally, my own preference is for a rather deep dating of PIE (around 7500 BP) for reasons I have laid out many times on Cybalist. Very few linguists would like to make PIE significantly older than that. Renfrew needs an older PIE to fit his "out of the Fertile crescent" scenario, but he isn't a linguist (and it shows :-)).
Piotr