Re: [tied] Time depth in comparative linguistics

The common view about IE grouping, is that Anatolian separated from
the main bulk of IE at the earliest stage.

An inteesting question is: "How great is the difference between
Mycenaean greek and the protolanguage of the main bulk. My
impression after having read some brief descriptions of Mycenean
Greek, is that this difference is not great, perhaps not greater
that 1500 years of development is eough to explain it. Then we are
5000 years back in time.

Then perhaps another 1500 years are enough to explain the
development from the IE proto-laguage.


--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
wrote:

>
> At 8:11:11 PM on Tuesday, July 4, 2006, mkelkar2003 wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > "The American linguist Terrence Kaufman, addressing this
> > general problem (Kauffman and Golla 2000: 47), has a
> > carefully formulated expression in which he suggests the
> > chronological limits of the comparative approach:
>
> > "The possibility of establishing a genetic grouping
> > requires (a) the availability of relevant data from the
> > languages being compared, which in turn usually requires
> > (b) that the relationship is no older than 8000-10,000
> > years before the earliest date at which the languages are
> > documented."
>
> > "Following this rule of thumb, and dating the earliest
> > Hittite records to c. 1400 B.C., with the earliest
> > Mycenaean Greek only a little later, would give an
> > earliest date for *PIE between c. 11, 400 and c. 9, 400
> > B.C. (Renfrew 2001, p. 39)."
>
> Which is completely uninteresting unless someone was
> actually claiming an even earlier date. The claim that PIE
> would be beyond the range of the comparative approach if it
> were any older than this certainly doesn't inconvenience
> those who think it substantially younger.
>
> Brian
>