Torsten:
>If a civilisation lives on a river, it travels that river. Period. Or
>we would see several independent civilisations.
You can't get from eastern Europe to Palestine just by flowing down
a river. There's also little motivation for any IE speaker to travel so
far when they can simply trade with the people around them. It's
cheaper, it's easier and you don't get killed in storms at sea that way.
>I see. Swedish has English loanwords, English has no (very few)
>Swedish loanwords, therefore there was indeed an intermediary, one
>that brought cultural and technological innovation into Sweden. Erh?
So... what you're saying is that because English and Swedish people
have televisions, telephones and other mass-media devices at their
disposal that has facilitated this linguistic exchange, you think that
IE speakers had similar devices that provided real-time communication
with their Semitic counterparts? Erh? That's quite an imagination
smorgasbord you've provided us but there's unfortunately little
food-for-thought to eat here.
>And they had no boats?
Again, boats travelling in-land? Not a likely trip for that time-period. The
same problem with the IE: Why would Semitic people travel so far
when they could trade with their direct neighbours?
>You should not let the word 'Wanderw�rter' delude you into thinking that
>words have feet and need land to transport themselves. Some sail.
Just as long as you're not swayed into thinking that people had
nothing better to do in the good ol' days than to sail insane
distances just to spread wanderwords.
I ignored the inane list you ranted after that. The remainder of your
post had no scientific merit nor anything to do with IE.
= gLeN
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca