Re[2]: [tied] GLEN AND ANATOLIA IN 7500BC

At 4:18:15 AM on Sunday, March 23, 2003, John wrote:

> In reply to my post Glen wrote

>> Movements of what though? Language? Do you see language
>> in the archaeology? No, you don't. What you see is either
>> population movement...This says absolutely nothing about
>> language. In fact it's quite deceptive the way you
>> present that fact.

> Glen, when people move they tend to take their language
> with them! Surely you don't see languages "moving" whilst
> people don't? Come on now Glen.

'Absolutely nothing about language' is perhaps a little
strong, but Glen is basically correct. I gather, for
instance, that there is nothing in the archaeological record
that can be associated with the arrival of Celtic in
Britain.

>> Yes, and there's a succinct reason why I repeat it over
>> and over. It's true that language **can** be a part of
>> culture but it is not necessarily so as with the example
>> of English in North America versus English in India. Same
>> language, different cultures.

> Glen show me a human culture that has no language and I
> will agree that it is not necessarily so. Language is
> ALWAYS a part of culture.

But you're ignoring the point that Glen obviously intended
to make: there is no necessary tie between language and
material culture. And of course he's right.

Brian