Sv: [tied] Re: Reconstructed PIE vs. theoretical PIE (was: loading)

Many regard Hittite as a "sisterlanguage" of PIE.

----Ursprungligt meddelande----
Från: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Datum: 2014-10-09 12:26
Till: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Ärende: [tied] Re: Reconstructed PIE vs. theoretical PIE (was: loading)

---In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, <flavianops@...> wrote :
>
> I should have perceived that. I agree with you that *reconstructed* PIE is a little "fictional," despite that PIE as defined as the proto-language Hittite, Latin, Sanskrit, Greek, &c come from, is a well-founded theory.

I don't think so. In fact, Hittite (Anatolian) morphology is more archaic than the rest. In my opinion, the classical genealogical tree for modelling language relationship is a simplification, and in the particular case of the IE family a *huge* one. I think this family is the result of several (and often complicated) expansions and language replacement processes over several millenia. So actually there were not just one but *several* proto-languages.