Re: Greek kitharis

> > Unless you care to maintain that some languages now classified as
> > IE in fact are not IE, you very clearly *are* claiming that all
> > known languages are IE. Which is lunacy.
>
> No, I said it and it's true. What are you objecting to about my
> response? I said there could be unknown languages that were non-IE,
> etc., so PIE wouldn't equal "Proto-World" if there were. I said
> there were almost certainly languages spoken in the past that
> weren't IE, maybe some written but undeciphered, and so on.
>
> This PW is supposedly the source of all languages because of it
> was the original (or very old if some other early branches died out
> in the interim). A recent replacement by PIE of other languages,
> even if total, wouldn't change the nature of such an original
> language or destroy the possibility of discovering something of
> non-IE languages by some unusual means. Your claim of my theory
> meaning there would be an equivalency between PIE and PW is not so,
> and you haven't given any reason for your apparent (continued)
> misunderstanding.

Ok, so what you're saying is that the language families usually
considered independent of IE, eg. Uralic, Semitic, Austronesian,
Basque, Kartvelian, Uto-Aztecan, Bantu, Khoi-San, are in fact IE? That
is a very unusual point of view.


Torsten