Re: [tied] Anatolian

> In my opinion, even if those para-IE dialects
> affected the core IE language, we cannot say that
> further IE languages are descendants of those
> para-IE dialects.

We agree. You're fighting a position I did not take.

> However, until I learn such facts, I will be
> claiming that any language group, also the IE
> family, comes from one single language, or even
> from one single dialect.

... Or even the merger of more than one dialect. Open
your mind to _all_ the logical possibilities.

> I also believe that such a model of diversing and
> replacing old dialects with newer ones, is
> universal.

Do you feel that dialectal merger is somehow not
universal?

> But I see no reasons for claiming that
> Proto-Anatolian was also one of such
> "partial" proto-languages.

Why not. It's a language. Languages behave like this.

> And if we assumed that Anatolian was a secondary
> group (a language league, or a Sprachbund if using
> German terminology), and so called Anatolian
> languages came to Anatolia in two (or more) waves,
> the branch should be termed polyphylectic.

Too vague. How big does a wave have to be before you
classify it as a wave instead of a ripple. Completely
arbitrary in the end.

To end, I just want to clarify that we agree on how
languages should be classified, but I don't believe
there is really such a thing as linguistic
homogeneity for any language in the strictest sense.
So speaking of IE as a single, unified language is
not very realistic, in my view.


= gLeN







__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com