On 2008-04-11 08:37, fournet.arnaud wrote:
> You complained that some people talk too much about something else
> than PIE, Nostratic or other pre-PIE hypotheses.
>
> What is the relevance of Yimas if Cybalist is supposed to focus on
> PIE_alone_?
>
> Apart from the fact, _you_think Yimas is interesting and
> _you_heroically_find something on it.
Did you follow the discussion? Kishore expressed his disbelief that a
"primitive" PIE society should have spoken a "sophisticated" language
with a complex grammar. Then Andrew asked if there were any modern
languages "as intricate and complex as Proto-Indo-European or Sanskrit
yet spoken by peoples generally considered fairly technologically
primitive". We have merely been providing examples of such languages,
thus showing that linguitic complexity does not depend on the level of
social or technological development. It _is_ relevant to the discussion
at hand.
Piotr