--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
wrote:
> This kind of theory will always crash on the obvious fact that some
> languages like Uralic Moksha displays clear Indic features.
>
Moksha?! Last I saw on this list was the Mordvin was the Uralic
language influence by IA, but I'll defer to your knwoledge; online
references welcome, though.
Anyway, those who imparted Indo-Aryan elements to this Uralic language
(and to Mitanni-Hurrian and Kassite) need not have been native to the
area where they exerted their influence. As in the Mitanni case, they
may have come from somewhere else. That somewhere may have been India,
as it was for the IA vocabulary transmissions to SE-Asian languages.
>
> And it will always crash on the obvious problem that there is no
reason why
> IE should have only expanded toward the north-west.
>
So what? Arabic expanded only to the northwest and west. Arab armies
conquered parts of Kazakhstan and Sindh far to the northeast and east
of Arabia but never arabicized those countries. Bantu expanded very
far from West Africa, but only to the east and southeast. Among
the "reasons" why languages expand here and not there, some are
predictable (deserts, mountain ranges and other geographical data)
while others are not (e.g. victories and defeats in war).
> Once established in India, Indic started expanding in all directions
as can
> be expected.
>
Indeed. Its marginal tentacles may have spread as far Mitanni and
Mokshaland.
Cheers,
KE