From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 58205
Date: 2008-04-29
----- Original Message -----
From: "koenraad_elst" <koenraad.elst@...>
>> This kind of theory will always crash on the obvious fact that some
>> languages like Uralic Moksha displays clear Indic features.
>>
>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.
========
Are you aware that the word Mordvin itself is Indo-Iranian ?
This suggestion that Mordvin could have got its Indo-Iranian lexical
adstrate from India is complete nonsense.
Arnaud
===========
>
> 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.
======
Arabic caused Urdu to be a different language from Hindi (East)
Arabic has given considerable LWs to Turcic (North).
You are obviously trying to make things weaker than they are
in order to make the complete absence of any early Indic impact on its
neighbours less absurd in your OIT.
But I don't buy this strategy.
Arnaud
============
> 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
=====
Its tentacles include :
- Tibetan alphabet to the north
- Chinese Fanqie system to the north-east
- multiple LWs to the east into Austro-Asiatic languages
- complete sanscritization of Dravidian languages.
None of these languages show any sign of having been influenced by anything
but Indic,
there is no Indo-european substrate in there,
one more obvious proof that Indic arrived late in India.
Arnaud
========