--- Piotr Gasiorowski <
gpiotr@...> wrote:
> On 2006-03-28 14:28, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> > The question is: if *akW-/*ap- "water" is a loan
> in IE, did it come
> > from a substrate, and if yes, which one. The
> answer is (ta-dah!) LBK,
> > Linearbandkeramik.
>
> I'm inclined to believe that the bearers of the LBK
> culture were PIE (or
> pre-PIE)-speaking. Their rapid expansion would
> account for the thorough
> IE-isation of central and western inland Europe, and
> the environment in
> which they lived fits the findings of IE "linguistic
> palaeontology".
****GK: It is unlikely that the language of LBK was
IE, since LBK cannot plausibly account (directly or
indirectly) for the IE-isation of northern and eastern
Poland (cf. the article of Nowak in ANTIQUITY
discussed back in 2001), the Baltic area, Ukraine, or
points east and north (cf. messages 17082, 17109,
17097 and 17125). And the notion that LBK was the
substrate which provided the "water" word to IE is
even less plausible, since it is not a demonstrable
substrate to any culture in these areas other than
TRB. TRB itself is hardly IE since it cannot plausibly
account for the IE-isation of the Baltics, Ukraine, or
points east and north. On the other hand, CW, which
originated from SS, and which plausibly accounts for
the IE-isation of central and northern Europe,
including the erstwhile GA area, (except for
adstrates, eastern Europe is just as 'thoroughly
IE-ised' as central and western inland Europe), need
not have borrowed the IE water word from any
substrate.*****
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com