From: tgpedersen
Message: 47203
Date: 2007-02-01
>Poor mr. Kelkar is being sucked into the vortex of linguistics...
> http://www-personal.umich.edu/~pehook/bangani.abbi2.html
>
> "What does this all prove7 Zoller's contention is correct. The
> language seems to have retained some very archaic structures,
> retaining PIE k-, -l~-, g- and -g-. Many. words in Bangani unlike
> other IA languages of the region have not witnessed palatalization
> defying RUKi Rule. It is difficult to prove at this point whether
> this is because of its affiliation to Kenturn language as claimed by
> Zoller. However, on the basis of the first-hand data acquired during
> these two field trips. it can be said without any prejudices and
> with some certainly that some Western Indo-European language
> (perhaps Tokharian) of which we have no knowledge so far. either had
> a significant role in substratumizing Bangani or, Bangani itself was
> genetically related to this unknown Western IE language. There are
> many other features in the language such as existence of O as
> against a of I.Ir., pre-verbal auxiliaries (without being a V2
> language system), and post auxiliary negatives that may also be seen
> as retentions of archaic structure in Bangani of which traces are
> only in Indo-European languages (Abbi 1997 forthcoming)."
>
> http://www-personal.umich.edu/~pehook/bangani.hock.html
>
> "A related question is the nature of the western centum influence.
> Words like _gOsti_ seem to rule out Greek influence (and thus the
> possibility that we are dealing with linguistic echoes of
> Alexander's army); _lOktO_ would eliminate Germanic and Celtic; and
> _kOtrO_ would eliminate Greek and Latin. That is, no known western
> centum language could be the source for all of the relevant words.
> At the same time, the fact that *a and *o exhibit the same outcome
> (O, no doubt via *a, see below) suggests possible affiliation with
> the Balto-Slavo-Germanic group (or possibly with Antalolian?)."