Re: Hercynian (again)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <bm.brian@...> wrote:

>
> >> I too consider the tradition PIE model as inadequate. I'd
> >> like to replace it with a model without language
> >> replacements and with just one tree, but with a couple of
> >> dozens of branch-crossings. So, a very strongly
> >> genealogical - but in noway binaristic - model, where
> >> there must have existed at least 500 diatopically
> >> differents branches of PIE still in PIE phonology from
> >> Atlantic to China along 40 millennia. [...]
>
> > I'm afraid your model not only is unrealistic but also a
> > RACIST one,
>
> Don't be ridiculous.
>

I'm not ridiculous but expressive.

> > because language replacement processes have existed all
> > throught the history of mankind,
>
> True, but irrelevant to the silly charge of racism.
>

Not really. As Mr David W. Anthony (BTW, one of the champions of the
Kurgan theory) pointed out, in language replacement processes, the
"loser" language is spoken by a minority stigmatized by the dominant
society, whose language is considered as prestigious. So pretending no
other languages than the historically attested ones were spoken in a
given area is fairly inaccurate, to say the least.

> > although History is always written (and often also
> > rewritten) by the winners.
>
> Actually, it *isn't* always written by the winners, though
> certainly this is very, very often the case.
>

There's a strong tendence to forget about minority languages in atlases
and text books. Too often the winners make active efforts to erase the
traces of "loser" language, for example, by translating alloglottic
toponyms to their own language and even people names. I think I should
have used "ethnical cleansing" instead of "racism".