Dear Alexander
You wrote
> Usually the 3rd branch - the Hurrito-Urartic group - is added.
I raised this matter with Johanna Nichols and she was highly
dismissive of the argument that HU was a member of the NEC group.
Her argument (which I thought was weak) was that HU languages are
only attested from the Middle Bronze Age and were the result of a
movement westwards from Iran. From this argument I suspect she sees
NEC languages as a pre HU substrate beneath a later Hurrian spread.
I on the other hand am very sympathetic to the thesis that HU is a
third (and possibly earlier) branch of NEC. In fact I tend to feel
that there are four separate "languages" within HU, as follows
..................|---------------- Urartian
...............|--|................
............|--|..|---------------- Hurrian
............|..|...................
....|-Proto-|..|------------------- Subartu
....|.H-U...|......................
PNEC|.......|---------------------- Proto-Tigrean
....|..............................
....|....|------------------------- Proto-Nakh
....|----|.........................
.........|------------------------- Proto-Daghestan
Subartu is the pre-Semitic, pre-Sumerian language along the Tigris
in the vacinity of Eshnuna and Ashur, traces of which appear in some
Sumerian and Akkadian documents. A number of people, I believe have
suggested that the names of Sumerian cities, of the Tigris and
Euphrates, of agricultural items and a number of arts and crafts are
not of Sumerian origin. I know that some of these (for example the
city name Bad Tabira = City of the Smiths, the second city of the
Sumerian Kinglist, are of Hurrian or Proto-HU) origin.
In regards to Nichols technique for dating the separation of Proto-
Nakh from Proto-Daghestan, Alexander asked
> What a technique does she use for such estimations?
I haven't got her paper on this in front of me Alexander - I'll send
it to you directly.
> If one takes into account the cognates listed below, these dates
> must be rejected because of the following reasons:
> - Domesticated cattle (bulls) arreared in the Near East only in
> the 7th mill. BC;
> - The Secondary Products Revolution took place even much later;
> - As can be seen from the Starostin's North Caucasian Etymology
> database, there is a word for pots among commom NEC roots:
> http://iiasnt.leidenuniv.nl/cgi-bin/response.cgi?
flags=engnnnl&root=config&basename=\data\cauc\caucet&first=1&sort=pro
to&text_proto=&method_proto=beginning&text_meaning=pot&method_meaning
=beginning&text_nakh=&method_nakh=beginning&text_aand=&method_aand=be
ginning&text_cez=&method_cez=beginning&text_lak=&method_lak=beginning
&text_darg=&method_darg=beginning&text_lezg=&method_lezg=beginning&te
xt_khin=&method_khin=beginning&text_abad=&method_abad=beginning&text_
comment=&method_comment=beginning&text_any=&method_any=substring
Wow! What a URL!!! I'll try to access this. This "pottery" root
would certainly place the split AFTER the shift from Pre-Pottery to
Post Pottery Neolithic (i.e. AFTER 8,000 BP)
> Besides, this database gives also a North Caucasian form for the
> yoke, which was invented as late as in the 4th. mill. BC:
> http://iiasnt.leidenuniv.nl/cgi-bin/response.cgi?
flags=engnnnl&root=config&basename=\data\cauc\caucet&first=1&sort=pro
to&text_proto=&method_proto=beginning&text_meaning=yoke&method_meanin
g=beginning&text_nakh=&method_nakh=beginning&text_aand=&method_aand=b
eginning&text_cez=&method_cez=beginning&text_lak=&method_lak=beginnin
g&text_darg=&method_darg=beginning&text_lezg=&method_lezg=beginning&t
ext_khin=&method_khin=beginning&text_abad=&method_abad=beginning&text
_comment=&method_comment=beginning&text_any=&method_any=substring
Alexander, if I have trouble with these links could I presume on
your services to copy the terms and email them to me please? I
would also be interested in any NEC roots for "goat", "star", "six"
and "seven".
Regards
John