--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "piervantrink" <piervantrink@...>
wrote:
>
> I think that Kartvelian, Indo-European and Afrasan are connected at an
early neolithic timedepth node (of course all languages descend from a
sole common language but the Kartvlian-Indeuropean-Afrasan node is
rather recent than let's say Sinic-Indeuropean node) as the 3 phyla are
inflective ablautic languges with laryngeals , glottals and
bi+triconsonantic roots as well as dual, feminin markers and of course
share many genetical (and not by borrowing as it's the case of the
roots-as well as shared grammatical that were acquired by uralic and
altaic speakers throughout sprachbund and superstratun and creolisation)
features those 3 phyla share with Uralic and Altaic
>
IMHO these isoglosses reflect areal contacts between some paleo-IE
dialect(s) and these other families in the Neolithic, but not a genetic
relationship. Most IE-ists would agree in that IE morphology is quite
recent (see Rodriguez Adrados for more details) and thus it can't be
used in order to stablish any genetic relationship between IE and other
families.
My own macro-comparative research points to IE and Altaic being part of
a Paleolithic paleo-IE phylum, whose reconstructed lexicon has words
relative to Boreal fauna and flora and at the same time lacks lexicon
relative to agriculture and metallurgy.