Re: Meaning of Aryan: now, "white people"?

I've seen mentions of (non-IE) substrate in Uralic.
Hungarian is deinitely not native to Hungary.
There is substrate in Saami.
I've read that Finnish is not native to Finalnd.
But better a Uralist speak to that.
My understanding is that Uralic split up somewhere
around 4,000 years ago. That is long after the end of
the Ice Age.
Uralic occupies a large area and occupied a large area
in the past. This is obviously the result of an
expansion that was triggered by some type of
technology appropriate to the region. This expansion
may or my not have been triggered by contact with IE
or some other group.
But let's hear from a knowledgeable Uralist --not a
crank or a shill for nationalist bullroar.

--- mkelkar2003 <swatimkelkar@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "fournet.arnaud"
> <fournet.arnaud@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > At any rate, I believe I have shown enough
> possible ways to
> > reasonably reconcile the lexical exchange between
> the eastern IE
> > languages and Uralic with an Indian Urheimat
> scenario (Elst 2000)."
> >
> > M. Kelkar
> > ==========
> >
> > It does not account for Mordvin vrgas being a
> Sanscrit word
> > not an iranian word.
> >
> > We are not dealing with PIE / Uralic lexical
> exchanges.
> > But specific languages to specific languages.
> > This is why your approach is basically flawed.
> >
> > Arnaud
>
>
> There is a Uralic Continuity Theory which would
> elminate the need for
> migrations of Uralic languages and by extention IE
> languages
>
> "3.1 The Uralic Continuity Theory
>
>
>
> In the last thirty years, there has been an
> important breakthrough in
> the history of European origins, which only recently
> has begun to
> attract the attention of specialists of other areas.
> This is the so
> called Uralic Continuity Theory (in Finnish:
> uralilainen
> jatkuvuusteoria), developed in the Seventies by
> archaeologists and
> linguists specialised in the Uralic area of Europe,
> that is the area
> of Finno-Ugric and Samoyed languages. This theory
> claims an
> uninterrupted continuity of Uralic populations and
> languages from
> Paleolithic: Uralic people would belong to the heirs
> of Homo sapiens
> sapiens coming from Africa, they would have occupied
> mid-eastern
> Europe in Paleolithic glacial times, and during the
> deglaciation of
> Northern Europe, in Mesolithic, would have followed
> the retreating
> icecap, eventually settling in their present
> territories (Meinander
> 1973, Nuñez 1987, 1989, 1996, 1997, 1998).
>
> The relevance of this theory for our problem lies
> in the following
> points:
>
>
>
> (1) it replaces an earlier `invasion theory',
> quite similar to the
> traditional IE one, and practically modelled on it.
>
>
>
> (2) It represents the first claim of
> uninterrupted continuity from
> Paleolithic of the second European linguistic
> phylum, thus opening the
> way to a similar theory for IE.
>
>
>
> (3) It is now current not only among specialists
> of Finno-Ugric
> prehistory and of Finno-Ugric languages, but has
> become part of the
> general culture in all countries where Uralic
> languages are spoken."
>
> M. Kelkar
>
> >
> > ==========
> > >
> >
>
>
>

____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs