Re: [tied] Anatolian

glen gordon wrote:

>> 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?

Do you know ONE example of such a merger? I do not know. Tell me about it.

>> 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.

No, because there are no common features of all Anatolian languages, and
only theirs. Contrary to Slavic, Germanic and so on. And if you know such
features, present them.

>> 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.

What is completely arbitrary is your view. I have presented not only what I
think but also why I think so. You only try to judge my views. It is not any
discussion. Give my facts, not your speculative instructions, OK? Facts,
examples, understand? Just like I have done.

> 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.

Webster's gives "homogeny". As English is a foreign language for me, I will
not discuss which form is correct. And you still seem to ignore what
"homogeny" means. Sorry, it is very ridiculous that I must learn you
English. Just take a look at a good dictionary. I have already quoted what
this term mean.

> So speaking of IE as a single, unified language is
> not very realistic, in my view.
>
>
> = gLeN

It would really be better if you treated my examples, and presented evidence
for your opinion. I have not seen any evidence up to here.

Grzegorz J.





___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com