Re: The personal pronouns of PIE (and other families) are loans

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <magwich78@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>

wrote:

>
> > Aha. Therefore I must conclude:
> > PIE is basically an Austronesian (cybalist: howl!) or Tai-Kadai
> > (cybalist: scream!) language relexified by an unknown language.
> >
> > That should keep us entertained in January. Hehehe.
>
> That has been your thesis this entire time.

Not the Austronesian/Thai basis, unknown relexification part.

>I would like to know how on Earth you arrived at such a conclusion.

Actually I haven't arrived at _that_ conclusion yet. I posed it as a
challenge: Sagart's argument seems sound when applied to East Asia.
Formally, the preconditions for it apply too for the Austronesian/IE
case. Question: is there a logical flaw here, because otherwise
we'll have to accept it.

> You are aware of the vast
> distances both in space and time, aren't you?

You are aware that the alternative is to assume the independent
discovery of agriculture in east and west? And that the distances
covered by agricultural expansion in East Asia and generally
acknowledged by archaeologists and linguists are comparable?


Torsten