Grzegorz:
> Some Anatolian languages preserved the distinction
> PIE *k^ : *k, and some had not. Some Anatolian
> languages preserved *a : *o, and some did not.
> Maybe we should ponder on whether the Anatolian
> group (or: subfamily) existed at all?
Well, actually...
I think the issues you're having with all of this
is that you are subconsciously imagining IE dialect
areas with strict, immalleable boundaries.
In reality, dialects in any language modern or ancient
are nothing more than "bundles of idiosyncratic
features" in a particular region. If you think about
dialects in this way, then we can understand both how
dialects can each have their own boundaries while
also recognizing that *some* of the features of one
dialect may overlap into other neighbouring dialect
regions (or even other language groups) by way of
simple areal influence.
Try this: Instead of drawing out a dialect map of
IE for yourself, try drawing out an isogloss map.
You'll start to understand that the word "dialect"
is a vague term because there are as many dialects as
there are isoglosses that you wish to pay attention
to. If you want to split IE into five notable
features, then you have five dialects. Ten isoglosses?
Then you have ten dialects, och så vidare, und so
weite, and so on, et cetera, yadayada.
So, in respect to the topic of Anatolian, you're
correct. There wasn't any "Anatolian" dialect area
in the strictest sense. Only a region from which
sprang the later Anatolian languages we now call
Hittite, Palaic, Luwian, Lycian, Lydian, etc. For
simplicity, we refer to that region and general
dialect area as Proto-Anatolian.
This same reasoning goes for all IE dialects.
> Can we really reconstruct, say, Lycian or Luwian
> inflexion so much satisfactorily to maintain the
> hypothesis that Proto-Anatolian ever existed?
We can legimately reconstruct Proto-Anatolian in
the same way that we can Proto-IE, as long as we
recognize that language is fluid. In other words,
when we reconstruct a language, we are merely
reconstruct the *general* features of the family
as a whole, or rather of the region from which the
language family originated.
How precise one wishes to be with the reconstruction
depends on how small a region you want to focus on,
whether it be Proto-IE as a whole or specifically the
region where Proto-Anatolian dialects were first
spoken.
To get a more precise picture of Proto-IE, you have
to realize that there was *always* dialectal
differences from region to region. This doesn't
negate the efforts of Proto-IE. It only makes things
less Hollywood than most people are used to on TV :)
= gLeN
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com