Re: On the ordering of some PIE rules

> > > Excellent!
> >
> > Out of curiosity: why do you find that excellent?
>
> Germanic is a kentum family but it shares so much with the satem
> ones. Grimm's law puts Germanic on top of satem languages or at
> least at par with them.

What do you mean by 'on top of'?

> What you are doing will put Germanic in its proper place hence
> pushing the dates for satemization backwards and the PIE homeland
> eastward. The CPHL project at Penn has uncovered problems with the
> Germanic also.

Those problems were with the affiliation of Germanic within the IE
family tree. I think they were caused by Proto-Germanic moving from
East to West as it was being created.

> > It's always been possible to do that, but the way I've proposed it
> > PIE will be so to speak be a mixed kentum/satem language which
> > could 'degenerate' into a pure kentum or pure satem language
> > anytime by generalization of allophones.
>
> That is why I brought up Bangani. South Asia would offer a good
> case for your theory of "degeneration." IIr and Balto-Slavic
> degenerated there but Bangani escaped.

Bangani almost did too, we're talking about a few dozen kentum words
surviving.

> At the same time Celtic/Germanic/Greek left after degenerating into
> kentum for western Europe.

Or they may have 'degenerated' (generalized one allophone) at several
different times, that option was always open as long as the language
stayed in the mixed kentum/satem state.


Torsten