GLEN AND ANATOLIA IN 7500BC

"Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...> wrote:
<<The fact is that Indo-European is a linguistic construct. Archaeology has
very, very little to do with telling us about a language. Therefore, it's
mostly the burden of linguists to determine whether any language was in
Anatolia in 7500 BCE.>>

Oh really? Is Anatolia a linguistic construct? Is 7500BC a linguistic
construct? Carbon-14 came out of a physics lab. Show me your laboratory
calibrated linguistic time-reader based on nanosecond calculated isotopic
degration. And while your at it, prove to me that Anatolia even existed in
7500BC and do it linguistically.

Glen, some observations:
1. In recorded time, people have spoken Greek, Turkic, Slavic, Celtic,
Hittite, Persian, Assyrian, Arabic, Carian, Phoenician, Lydian, Armenian,
Kurdish, etc., etc., etc. in "Anatolia". There is no reason to think that
fewer languages from near and far were spoken in Anatolia BEFORE written
records. And no reason to think that one of them could not have been some
form of Pre-PIE. There is no way of knowing what was being spoken. As a
matter of fact, the only reason we know anyone at all was even living in
Anatolia IS archaeology.

2. There's not one stitch of pure linguistic evidence as to what language was
spoken in Anatolia in 3000BC. There are no written records. Whether groups
of people moved in or moved out or stayed where they were and came from near
or far or left for points unknown is at best an archaeological matter. And
at worst completely unknown.

3. There's not one stitch of pure linguistic evidence as to what language was
spoken in Anatolia in 4000BC. There are no written records. Whether groups
of people moved in or moved out or stayed where they were and came from near
or far or left for points unknown is at best an archaeological matter. And
at worst completely unknown.

4. There's not one stitch of pure linguistic evidence as to what language was
spoken in Anatolia in 5000BC. There are no written records. Whether groups
of people moved in or moved out or stayed where they were and came from near
or far or left for points unknown is at best an archaeological matter. And
at worst completely unknown.

5. There's not one stitch of pure linguistic evidence as to what language was
spoken in Anatolia in 6000BC. There are no written records. Whether groups
of people moved in or moved out or stayed where they were and came from near
or far or left for points unknown is at best an archaeological matter. And
at worst completely unknown.

6. There's not one stitch of pure linguistic evidence as to what language was
spoken in Anatolia in 7000BC. There are no written records. Whether groups
of people moved in or moved out or stayed where they were and came from near
or far or left for points unknown is at best an archaeological matter. And
at worst completely unknown.

7. And it follows from the above that there is not one stitch of linguistic
evidence as to what was spoken in Anatolia in 7500BC.

<<(PS: IE IS NOT DIRECTLY FROM ANATOLIA!!!! ARRRRRGGGGGHHHHH!!!!)>>

Yeah, right.

Steve