--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
wrote:
>
> A loan from this group of languages is highly unlikely, however,
> because they do not seem to have been in close proximity anywhere
> or anytime that we know.
Patrick, you are right : a loan is impossible viewing the
geographical distance between the 2 populations...
The single possibility that remains (if we don't have a coincidence
here or, why not? some English loans ) is that PIE is a descendant of
a Proto-...-Proto-Khoisan Language
For a genetic point of view this has sense:
============================================
"According to neutral (autosomal) gene analysis, the Khoisan are
similar to other sub-Saharan African populations.
The study of their Y-chromosomes however shows that their original Y-
haplogroup A is the OLDEST HUMAN LINEAGE and Could Diverge from the
evolutionary tree of other humans More than 100 000 years ago (Knight
et al. 2003).
Khoisans thus actually represent the MOST ARCHAIC human group that
was Largely Isolated from the rest of mankind for Tens of Thousands
of years.
A long time ago, a part of their ancestors headed for north and gave
birth to modern Nilotes, which is evident from the presence of a
subclade A3b2 in East Africa.
According to Knight et al. (2003) Y-haplogroup A is today present in
various Khoisan tribes at frequency of 12-44%.
The rest is formed by recent admixture of Bantu male lineages E3a (18-
54%) and in some tribes, a noticeable Pygmy traces are visible (B2b).
The Khoisan also show the largest genetic diversity in mtDNA of all
human populations. Their original mtDNA haplogroups L1d and L1k are
one of the OLDEST FEMALE LINEAGES as well.
The San people themselves say they came first of all human beings,
and while many cultures bear that same myth, each of themselves, not
only genetic but archaeological evidence bears the Khoisan out.
The distinct characteristics of all human varieties, from those of
East Asia to those of Northern Europe and the Americas all may have
beginnings in the physiology of the Khoisan people"
source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khoisan
If true, that this language was isolated for TEN of THOUSANDS of
YEARS for sure it needs to be reported to PIE....
If /y-uH/ & /t-uH/ was already /uH/ at least 50K before this could
be amazing....regarding the stability of a language...
> Secondly, I would question your reconstruction of *tuH.
>
> It seems to me that the earliest PIE for 'you (sing.)' should be
*té, which form (*te) we see in the accusative.
>
> Why? Because *té cannot derive from *tu/u: by any normally
> recognized process. But *tu/u: (and more transparently, genitive *t
>(e)we) _can_ be derived from *té if we assume a *-w case-marker.
Patrick I used *tuH- & *y-uH because Lubotsky or Beekes 'used it'...I
mean because is the current standard model
Marius
P.S. And how you integrate /y-uH/-form in your model...
....especially when the Khoisan form of 'you' (==> 100k ago ) was
uH :)