From: tgpedersen
Message: 62328
Date: 2008-12-31
>Often in the past your linguistic method has puzzled me.
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "bmscotttg" <BMScott@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@> wrote:
> >
> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "bmscotttg" <BMScott@> wrote:
>
> > >> PIE as Proto-World?! Even Ruhlen has more sense than that.
> >
> > > I didn't say PIE was the original language, or the source of
> > > all languages ever spoken.
> >
> > You did, however, say that it was the source of all known languages,
> > which is what is normally meant by 'Proto-World'.
>
> Not at all. There may be languages spoken that haven't been
> discovered or examined by linguists, or not described at all (or well
> enough for correct classification), and some undeciphered languages
> obviously could be non-PIE.
>
> Even if it's a fact that all current and known extinct l. are IE,
> that doesn't change the nature of any original language spoken long
> before PIE.