Re: [tied] Macro family tree

Glen:

Actually, I think that Michael is referring to Steven Pinker. I did a Google search of Pinker + Nostratic, and here is a URL that shows a chart of what Michael described:

http://www.friesian.com/trees.htm

Something for you to mull over perhaps?

Andy Howey

Glen Gordon <glengordon01@...> wrote:

Michael: >I found a book in the Languages and References section of a Book >Outlet by an author with the last name Pink (that's about all I >remember), and in it is a language tree map showing Nostratic, >Sino-Tibetan, and New Guinean as 3 branches of of single original >language, with Nostratic further branching into Afro-Asiatic, >Dravidian, and Eurasiatic, and Eurasiatic into Indo-Euro, Altaic >and Uralic. I'm confused because I thought Nostratic and Eurasiatic were >alternative to each other. Anyone know? Eurasiatic is usually, for the most part, considered a subset of Nostratic as long as we cut out Ainu from the Greenbergian definition of the term, which is surely not Nostratic in any way conceivable. In Bomhard's version of Nostratic, Eurasiatic is explicitly defined as a subset of the larger macrofamily. Although I know nothing of Pink, I suspect from the description you give that he is following more of the Bomhardian model which supports the correspondance IE *t = Nostratic *t, rather than IE *t = Nostratic *t? (ejective). - gLeN _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.