[tied] Re: Proto Vedic Continuity Theory of Bharatiya (Indian) Lang

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> --- Richard Wordingham
> <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco
> > Brighenti" <frabrig@...>
> > wrote:
> > > Of course not. But, really, the invasionist
> > historical paradigm was
> > > demised long ago by most of serious researchers.
> > Modern Indologists
> > > and Indo-Iranian historical linguists tend to
> > speak of transfers of
> > > ideologies, subsistence systems, language, and
> > spiritual culture
> > > from one group to the other as often as movements
> > of people.

Even THAT has to be backed up by evidence. The Mongol rule in the
Indian subcontinent did not maket it Turkic speaking. The Greek
Scyanthian invasions had no significant linguistic impact. Where is
the evidence that such Khanate's existed? The Puranic list which are
summarily dismissed by Indologist do not speak of them.

Such

> > > processes do not necessarily involve large-scale
> > migrations,
> > > although actual physical movement (starting with,
> > e.g., transhumance
> > > tricklings in involving the transference of
> > pastoralist innovations
> > > from one population to another, and the emergence
> > of 'khanate'-like
> > > territorial domains) and intermarriage are not
> > excluded. Various
> > > types of military interaction, such as cattle
> > raids, actual war-like
> > > clashes, battles and even the incidental invasion
> > of smaller or
> > > larger bands, groups or tribes may or may not be
> > part of the
> > > picture.
> >
> > Can you give a better documented example of such
> > processes causing
> > language replacement? The nearest example I can
> > think of is the
> > replacement of Russian by French among the Russian
> > upper class in the
> > 18th century, but could that have resulted in Russia
> > becoming
> > French-speaking? Possibly Brussels's speaking
> > French rather than
> > Walloons or Flemish is a better example.
> >
> > Richard.
>
> *****GK: There are so many well-attested instances of
> "invasions" (large, small, middling etc..) in human
> history that the national-autochtonist position

Calling an authochtonist position nationalistic is stereotyping the
opponent to avoid answering them. Whether or not his theory is
correct Alinei is no Italian nationalist. Indeed autochtonism is the
by *default* hypothesis. Invasions and migrations, as the IEL now want
to call them must be proven. Occam's razor applies here. The two
most famous examples of migrations; the Bantu and the Native American
involving language change are the work of Greenberg a
non-Indo-European linguist. More importantly they are backed by a ton
of other evidence. The Bantu migrations altered the racial and
agricultural landscape of sub Saharan Africa completely.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2120glang.html>

The most splendid coincidence between linguistics and genetics occurs
in the case of the Native Americans as expected. Historical
linguistics works only when migration patterns are known before hand.

"LUIGI CAVALLI-SFORZA: When we took all the (genetic) data from
American natives, they clearly fell into three classes, and they
correspond exactly to the linguistic families that have been
postulated by Greenberg. Not only that, but the family which is most
heterogeneous of all genetically is the one that is linguistically
more heterogeneous of all (parenthesis added)"




of the

> Kalyamaran-Kelkar school(s) seems a priori
> improbable, to say the least.

Y

I confess that I have

> not read much of the literature (immense no doubt and
> getting "immenser" (:=)) of the autochtonist
> school(s),

You only need to read one paper by IE linguist H. H. Hock presented at
the 1996 Univ of Michigan conference.

M. Kelkar

but the examples offered here by K/K are

> not particularly encouraging. The helpful suggestions
> made above by Francesco need to be concretized (I
> quite agree with Richard on this). The two
> possibilities Richard noted do not seem convincing as
> an explanation of the presence of Indo-Aryan in India
> without further assumptions that are more complex than
> the theory (or theories) they are intended to replace.
> Richard himself is not too keen on the Russian
> example, and I don't really see how the Brussels
> scenario is much better. In both cases BTW we have the
> presence of a most potent and extremely
> well-documented "French base" to be imitated. Where is
> the "base" of the Indo-Aryan languages outside of
> India?*****
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>