<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18999">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Dear All,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I've written a review of APUA5 for
LinguistList.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Unfortunately they seem to be very busy these last
weeks and nearly two months later it's not yet published.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I think it's interesting to discuss these issues
here slightly in advance.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>The review is not neutral as you'll see and I tend
to have my own point of view on some of the issues.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Best </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>A.F</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>***</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>AUTHOR: Kari, James and Ben A. Potter (Eds.)<?xml:namespace prefix =
o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>TITLE: The Dene-Yeniseian Connection<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>SUBTITLE: <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>PUBLISHER: (APUA) Anthropological Papers of the University of
Alaska<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>YEAR: 2010<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>ISBN: 0041-935400000 <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>Arnaud Fournet, La Garenne Colombes (France)<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>SUMMARY<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>The book investigates two sets of languages: (1) Yeniseian (YE),
spoken along the Yenisei River in Siberia and severely endangered, and (2)
Na-Dene (ND), spoken in Northwest America. The central claim proposed in the
book is that potential genetic connections exist between YE and ND, therefore
leading to a new linguistic family of higher rank: (Na-)Dene-Yeniseian
represented on two different continents. This hypothesis is primarily developed
by Ed. Vajda, a specialist of Yeniseian languages. It is presented as the “lead
article” of the book (p.1) but the book contains many other articles deserving
much attention as well.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>The VI+363-page book comprises 17 papers, written by different
contributors belonging to several fields. It includes (1) an introduction by the
editors, (2) Part1, presenting linguistic evidence for the claim, (3) Part2,
examining consequences and relationships of the linguistic claim for other
fields such as archeology, physical anthropology, kinship terms, mythological
themes, etc., (4) Part 3, peer-reviews of the claim. Part3 is a conspicuous
feature as a book seldom includes contradictory sections. The aim of the editors
is apparently to stimulate a world-wide discussion of the issues dealt with in
the book. Judging from cross-references within the book most contributors had
the opportunity to read other contributions in a spirit of mutual fertilization
and emulation. Appendices explain how to read these not so well-known languages,
which are sometimes written with conflicting conventions. <SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>Editors Introduction: The Dene-Yeniseian Connection: Bridging Asia
and North America (James Kari and Ben A. Potter) (p.1-24). This part is an
introduction to the wealth of issues discussed in the book. It also contains an
account of the recent developments of the Na-Dene-Yeniseian issue. It is
particularly valuable for the four (geo-)linguistic maps (p.6-9). A kind of
summary of the whole book is provided (p.5). <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>Part 1. The [Linguistic] Evidence for Dene-Yeniseian
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper1] The Dene-Yeniseian Hypothesis: An Introduction (Bernard
Comrie) (p.25-32). This paper is a kind of long abstract of Paper2 and can be
reviewed with it.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper2] A Siberian Link with Na-Dene Languages (Edward J. Vajda)
(p.33-99). This chapter is the longest of the book with 67 pages and can be
divided into four subsections: (1) a short presentation of YE mentioning
previous hypotheses about YE genetic links and including a long footnote
expressing gratefulness to a large number of people, (2) EJV's approach of
comparative linguistics (3) a comparison of some morphological elements of YE
and ND, (4) a comparison of lexical items. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper3] Yeniseian, Na-Dene, and Historical Linguistics (Edward J.
Vajda) (p.100-118). This section is mainly autobiographical with some
theoretical considerations. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>Part 2. The Interdisciplinary Context for
Dene-Yeniseian<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper4] Genes across Beringia: A Physical Anthropological
Perspective on the Dene-Yeniseian Hypothesis (G. Richard Scott and Dennis
O’Rourke) (p.119-137). This section is a bibliographic survey of currently
available genetic data with a special focus on the issue of possible links
between YE and ND populations. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper5] Archaeological Patterning in Northeast Asia and Northwest
North America: An Examination of the Dene-Yeniseian Hypothesis (Ben A. Potter)
(p.138-167). This section addresses the issue of the archeological
(dis-)continuities and their potential correlations with human migrations or
cultural transformations. It focuses on Siberia and Northwest America and
proposes 6 scenarios which may account for a YE-ND link. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper6] The Palatal Series in Athabascan-Eyak-Tlingit, with an
Overview of the Basic Sound Correspondences (Jeff Leer) (p.168-193). This
section describes the sound correspondences of Proto-ND on the basis of concrete
and detailed lexical data. One of the latest developments in ND phonology is the
introduction of palatal(ized) stops.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper7] The Concept of Geolinguistic Conservatism in Na-Dene
Prehistory (James Kari) (p.194-222). This section deals with an unusual feature
of Athabaskan: in spite of covering the largest area of all North Amerindian
families, Athabaskan is extraordinarily homogeneous. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper8] Dene-Yeniseian and Processes of Deep Change in Kin
Terminologies (John W. Ives, Sally Rice, and Edward J. Vajda) (p.223-256). This
section examines the anthropological and social features pertaining to kinship
in YE and ND languages. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper9] Selecting Separate Episodes of the Peopling of the New
World: Beringian–Subarctic–Eastern North American Folklore Links (Yuri E.
Berezkin) (p.257-278). This section deals with comparative mythology.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper10] Comparison of a Pair of Ket and Diné (Navajo) Myth Motifs
(Alexandra Kim-Maloney) (p.279-284). This section deals with a mythological
theme which seems common to YE and ND people. The name of the (dragon-)fly in
association with supernatural powers and various cultural artefacts seem to be
shared. This point supports the DE-YE connection. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>Part 3. Commentaries on the Dene-Yeniseian
Hypothesis<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper11] On the First Substantial Trans-Bering Language Comparison
(Eric P. Hamp) (p.285-298). This section is an enthusiastic eulogy of historical
linguistics and of the supposedly proven ND-YE connection. The style is more
personal than academic. As regards linguistic genetic studies as a field EPH
suggests to call it “linguistic modern cladistics” (p.285) whereas
“genealogical” is preferred to “genetic” in other papers
(p.25).<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper12] Proving Dene-Yeniseian Genealogical Relatedness (Johanna
Nichols) (p.299-309). The paper describes a very idiosyncratic alternative to
the standard methods of historical linguistics. It is little likely to gain any
acceptance. JN tends to accept the (most probably) false YE-ND connection, even
though she is aware that the geographic distance between these two groups is a
problem that would need a plausible answer. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper13] Yeniseian: Siberian Intruder or Remnant? (Michael
Fortescue) (p.310-315). In this paper MF explains how he has moved from
sceptical to moderately supportive of the ND-YE connection. He examines four
scenarios of split and dispersal of this “family” with a focus on the idea that
YE would be closer to Tlingit than to the rest of ND. One of the scenarios
include a return from North America to Siberia. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper14] Transitivity Indicators, Historical Scenarios, and Sundry
Dene-Yeniseian Notes (Andrej A. Kibrik) (p.316-319). AAK first describes himself
as an experienced Athabaskanist and typologist. This peer-review is brief and
strives to “count as constructive”. But it definitely reads like politely worded
poison for the claim that Na-Dene and Yeniseian might be genetically close. The
gist of AAK's objections is that Na-Dene Transitivity Indicators (TIs or
classifiers) are largely coherent throughout the family, which suggests they
were “established morphologically at the Proto-Na-Dene-stage” (p.317). In
addition to this coherence, they are prefixed right to the verb stem, which
confirms that they “must constitute the earliest acquisition of the proto-ND
inflected verb” (p.317). In contrast with this situation “what bothers [AAK]
most of all is that the ND transitivity indicators do not find a clear
counterpart in Yeniseian” (p.317). AAK concludes: “I am afraid that, as long as
the status of the immediately pre-root TIs is not clarified, morphological
argument for the [Dene-Yeniseian] relationship largely fails [sic].” (p.318)
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper15] Dene-Yeniseian, Phonological Substrata and Substratic Place
Names (Willem J. de Reuse) (p.320-323). This peer-review is rather neutral about
EJV's theory and is more about raising issues of principles and methods. WJdR
first reemphasizes Fortescue's observation that “Yeniseian looks more like an
intruder than a remnant.” (p.320) Yeniseian phonology significantly differs from
those of its present-day neighbors which tends to show that their mutual areal
interaction appears to be virtually nil and cannot be old. It could be added
that the same is true for morphology. Next WJdR exemplifies the difficulty of
dealing with toponymic "substrates" with the cases of Vasconic and Old European
theories. One of the issues to be addressed according to WJdR is the distance
between Yeniseian and Na-Dene without any apparent toponymic connecting dots
which could account for the dispersal of a unique original population. WJdR
prudently concludes “that Yeniseian placenames are just one layer in that
[Siberian] picture, thus not necessarily a substratic one.” (p.322)
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper16] Dene-Yeniseian, Migration and Prehistory (John W. Ives)
(p.324-334). This section begins with the “apparent impasse” of the
Dene-Yeniseian relationship that “the genetic data” are so “seemingly at odds”
with the “linguistic evidence” and wonders how this contradiction could be
solved. (p.325) This section is not exactly a review but more a kind of article
about the relationships between archeology and linguistics as applied to the
case of Apachean. JWI describes how small groups of Apachean speakers have
managed to grow and adopt new cultural features while remaining fairly stable
linguistically. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper17] The Dene Arrival in Alaska (Don Dumond) (p.335-346). This
section discusses the different time windows for waves of migration into
Northwest American and the potential connections between present-day groups,
like Eskimo-Aleut and ND, and archeological cultures. DD somehow rhetorically
and theoretically wonders which of Eskimo-Aleut and ND should be considered
earlier. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>Appendix A Orthographic Conventions for Yeniseian and Na-Dene
(compiled by James Kari); Appendix B Symbols and Abbreviations. Very nice and
useful reference tables. NB: Phonemes f and v are inverted in table 12A, typos:
vowles, trompe l'oeille [oeil] (p.353).<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>EVALUATION<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>Even though this only has an indirect bearing on quality, the book is
not free from typos or erratic spellings in several papers: Tur[c]ologist (p.9),
configu[r]ation (p.12), Yensieian (p.17), Yenisieian (p.314), Athapaskan,
Athabaskan, Athabascan (p.20), Yuork [Yurok] (p.21), pedagocial [pedagogical]
(p.22), toutes [routes] (p.24), Berling [Berlin] (p.24), geneticly (p.106).
Transliteration from Russian is often terrible: iikh [i jih] ‘and their’ (p.22).
The same work: Starostin (1982) is transcribed in several ways, sometimes
erroneously: enisejskix (p.32), Enisejskikh (p.117), enis[e]jskikh (p.98,
p.359). <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>The evaluation does not cover the internal peer-reviews which are
described in the summary.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper2] A Siberian Link with Na-Dene Languages
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>To put it simple and short the scientific value of Subsection3
dealing with morphology is very low. There are considerable problems.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>1. A general problem with the YE+ND connection is that EJV leaves
previous proposals undiscussed. According to EJV “the position of Ket in Inner
Eurasia has remained as enigmatic as that of Basque in Europe, Zuni in the
American Southwest, or Burushaski in South Asia.” (p.36) Actually the position
of YE is not “enigmatic”. YE has been compared with Caucasic, and Caucasic with
Salish, so if a new link is added between YE and ND, then Salish and ND, which
are geographically contiguous, should be closely related. Apparently nobody
proposed a Salish+ND group, not even the boldest “macro-lumpers”.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>2. Another problem is the huge and increasingly exasperating gap
between a number of claims and statements made in the section and the failure to
deliver anything concrete and real. Formal equations can be found between
Indo-European languages: Latin <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">crE-dEre
</I>= Old Irish <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">cre-tim</I> = Sanscrit <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">s'rad-dadhAti </I><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>= Avestic <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">zrazdA</I> ‘to put the heart in > to
believe’. Formal equations between *attested* languages have the virtue of being
highly suggestive and self-explanatory. One equation between Eyak and Athabaskan
is presented in another paper (p.212). It is not clear (and maybe doubtful)
whether such formal equations are possible between YE and ND languages. In all
cases none is presented. Instead of concrete comparisons one has to read an
abstruse meta-linguistic discourse, where it is most of time impossible to
disentangle description, comparison, reconstruction, hypothesis and sheer
speculation. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>3. The argumentation is mostly abstract and based on *reconstructed*
patterns. One would like to see the real data which are accounted for by the
reconstructions. It is often unclear if the forms are EJV's own creations and
interpretations or taken from ND specialists' internal reconstructions based on
ND data alone. Most forms have no references or are allegedly “based on” other
people's works. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>4. Another methodological problem is this sentence: “The Yeniseian
perfective/stative suffix is productive in both Ket/Yugh and Kott, showing that
it belongs to the oldest [sic] layer of the verb morphology.” (p.42) The
reasoning is egregiously false. As taught by the comparative method, only
synchronically non productive forms belong to the potentially oldest layer of
morphology. It is most of time unclear what substantiates the claim(s) that YE
forms should be considered old or fossilized. Neither the synchronic
descriptions nor the diachronic reconstructions of the YE+ND languages can be
easily grasped or assessed. A similar and relevant critique is expressed by one
of the internal reviewers (p.318). The claim that YE shares “a system of
morphological homologies with the oldest [sic] layer of” ND is<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>pointedly questioned by one reviewer.
See Paper14. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>5. The severest problem is the confusion of synchronic / typological
with diachronic / inherited features. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>The backbone of the theory is that YE and ND supposedly share the
feature of having a prefixal verb pattern. The reasoning can be described as
follows: [Step1] EJV compares Ket and Proto-YE with other patterns: Sumerian,
Caucasic, Burushaski, Bantu. EJV concludes that these patterns are different
from YE and therefore dismisses any “southern Eurasian” links. [Step2] ND is
also different from other Native American prefixal systems displayed by
Algonkian, Caddoan, etc. [Step3] YE and ND patterns are similar. Therefore it
teaches us something genetic about them. [Step4] Some of the elements which fill
the slots are similar. Hence: proven. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>As reminded by BC (p.30) and EJV himself (p.34) this slot pattern is
a typological feature which exists in a number of languages, including French
which is not mentioned: for example je lui en ai donné, etc. Even though the
elements are separated by orthographic blanks, the rigid slot pattern is there
for all tenses and moods, including non finite forms. French is interesting
because it shows that this feature can easily and rapidly spring out of a
language, like Latin, where it did not exist. My objection to EJV's reasoning is
that any of the cited languages, from Caucasic to Caddoan, can have tinkered and
divergently created its own pattern, just like French did out of Latin material.
In addition it is hardly believable that this typological feature could be
preserved for milleniums by Na-Dene and Yeniseian from their proto-languages.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>To put it bluntly the whole reasoning is hopelessly flawed. It
transforms a typological feature into an inherited feature. French shows that
the (dis)similarities that EJV uses to extract a YE+ND perimeter out of a huge
set of Eurasian and Amerindian languages presenting that feature prove utterly
nothing. It is not even clear why the closest relatives of YE or ND should be
looked for preferably among languages with a prefixal verb morphology, because
this typological feature is irrelevant for genetic studies as is exemplified by
French. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>6. The premice that Proto-YE had a prefixal pattern does not seem
coherent with the examples given (p.49). Kott has verbal suffixes and does not
seem to support the “reconstruction” presented (p.37). The table (p.50) cites a
form i- ‘P2Sg’ for Ket but the only attested form is
k(u)-.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>7. §2.2.2 about pronouns does not show any transparent isolated or
systemic look-alikes between YE and NC. As noted by EJV “Dene-Yeniseian differs
from established families (as well some more speculative ones) in the relative
inscrutability of its pronominal morphology.” (p.53) Even though the resort to
pronominal forms may be excessive in comparative linguistics, this is one more
(potentially serious) hitch. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>8. In addition the morphemic comparanda are conspicuous for being
often made up of only one consonant such as <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">l</I>, <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">n</I>, <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">x</I>, <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">s</I>, <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">y</I>, which can be the worn-out residue of
about any kind of complex morphemes and more marked phonemes. Their testimony is
therefore exceedingly weak. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>In other words, and as a conclusion about grammatical features, it is
impossible to adhere to the reasoning and the conclusions proposed in the
section. There are massive obvious flaws and the kind of data, comparanda,
reasonings and requirements that a comparative linguist would like to read is
missing. The wording is abstruse and there is almost no real substance.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>The last part of the section deals with lexical items and potential
sound correspondences. It is much more concrete, even though it raises several
issues as well. [Issue1] The Proto-ND consonant inventory is two or three times
richer than the limited Yeniseian inventory. That situation contains a serious
potential for bogus matches by chance coincidence. [Issue2] There is no table of
sound correspondences. [Issue3] The comparisons are atomistic. What are the
systems of vowels and consonants of Proto-YE and Proto-ND and how do they match?
It is possible that a different reconstruction of ND could rearrange
phonological features so as to have fewer consonants and two more vowels
accounting for palatalized or labialized features of consonants. Such a
reanalysis might make ND more easily manageable from a comparative point of
view, be it with YE or another group. [Issue4] As a rough indication of lexical
relationships one would like to see a wordlist of<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>basic vocabulary, for example that of
Swadesh-100 with primary data from all languages involved in the study. The
claim (p.53) that “evidence of the genetic connection comes more obviously from
[...] basic vocabulary” remains unsupported. See Paper3. </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">[Issue5] Another
problem is the system of correspondences and its internal coherence and
plausibility. Apparently ND has a three-way contrast: voiceless ~ aspirate ~
glottalized. Some of the “cognates” proposed by EJV are: ND *t'ik'y ‘ice’ = Ket
<I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">tik</I> and Kott <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">thik</I> ‘snow, ice on the ground’, that is
to say ND glottalized is YE voiceless. This can be compared with PA*ts'əq
‘finger’ = Ket <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">tə'q</I>, where YE glottal
stop appears near a ND voiceless consonant. The glottalized and voiceless
features seem to be inverted. This problem of inverted glottalization is
mentioned by Comrie (p.30) [Issue6] Several items are in my opinion borrowed
from Uralic into Yeniseian and certainly cannot be counted as cognates between
YE and ND: PY *ses ‘river’ < PU *sos ‘wet’, PY *se's ‘larch’ < PU *sokse
‘cedar, pine, conifer’, etc. In addition these two borrowings show that the
theory developed (p.70) about Proto-YE glottal stop is wrong. Glottal stop is
and was a segment (PU [ks] > PY ['s]). The attempt to get rid of that phoneme
as “optional” to facilitate comparison with ND is unacceptable. The phonemic
status of glottal stop in (Proto-)YE ruins the system of correspondences
proposed in the paper. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>As a conclusion, the section proves nothing about YE and ND's
relative genetic positions. It is not even suggestive of a possibly close
relationship. There are counter-intuitive features such as pronouns being
completely dissimilar, tentative sound correspondences being inverted and some
“cognates” being Uralic loanwords. All these features are disturbing to say the
least. The premice that Proto-YE used to have a prefixal verb morphology similar
to that of ND is not even proved. In addition the theory proposed is not a
credible alternative to previous suggestions that YE may be related to Caucasic,
which has also been suggested to be related to Salish, and these connections
make sense in my opinion. (See Paper4) </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The claim that
YE is a close (or the closest) genetic relative of ND is near doubtless false in
my opinion. People who might be attracted by the DE-YE connection must be aware
that pronouns, kinship terms and basic vocabulary have nearly nothing in common
and that there is hardly any transparent formal equation between these
languages. As a matter of fact the rest of the book shows that no real support
for this claim can to be found in other fields like genetics, anthropology, etc.
It is fascinating (and cruel...) to see how scholars try to handle a (near
doubtless) false hypothesis in the rest of the book. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper3] Yeniseian, Na-Dene, and Historical
Linguistics<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>The section confirms that EJV is not familiar with the methods and
issues of historical linguistics and with the historiography of the field. It is
now well-known that Jones' “famous” conference in Calcutta in 1786 is certainly
not a starting point for the study of the Indo-European family (Cf. Boxhorn,
Leibniz, Ten Kate, etc.). It is also amazing to read that “Yeniseian-Na-Dene
cognates are probably no more than 10 percent of the basic vocabulary”. (p.115)
That level is notoriously that of random and it tears apart the claim that the
YE-ND connection is “proved” by basic vocabulary. It can also be noted that “the
most striking proposed cognate [...] Ket <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">qy'j</I> and Proto-Athapaskan *<I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">q'ëj</I>” (p.106) for ‘birchbark’ is no less
strikingly similar to Uralic *<I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">koj-wa,
koj-ku, koj-ma</I> ‘birch, birch-bark (vessel)’, which undermines its status as
a potential isogloss between YE and <SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>ND. </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Quite obviously
EJV underestimates the issue of (Uralic) borrowings in Yeniseian (p.). According
to my own preliminary surveys Uralic (especially Ugric) loanwords into YE are
certainly not “an inconsequential percent of the vocabulary.”
(p.101)</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper4] Genes across Beringia: A Physical Anthropological
Perspective on the Dene-Yeniseian Hypothesis <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>The conclusion is coherent with the premice that genetics and
linguistics are most often correlated: “there is no specific gene, haplogroup,
or dental trait that provides a direct link between the Kets and any Na-Dene
speaking population.” Unsurprisingly genetics and physical anthropology confirm
that the ND-YE connection is (most probably) false. Haida would also be
confirmed to be unrelated to ND. The section also brings support to the
hypothesis that Salish and Northwest coast “Indians” have European features (a
variant of mainly European gene X2).<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper5] Archaeological Patterning in Northeast Asia and Northwest
North America: An Examination of the Dene-Yeniseian Hypothesis
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>Among potential problems, some areas are nearly terra incognita and
the differences in Russian and American academic traditions and the lack of
descriptive standardization are also hindrances to synthesizing available
archeological records. The section is modestly not presented as a “lead article”
by BAP who is also editor of the book but it certainly deserves to be considered
one. A key point is that there is no indication of human migrations between ca.
-14000 and ca. -5000 calBP between Siberia and North America (p.154). This
conclusion has a clear bearing on any ethno-linguistic scenario linking
Amerindian languages with Eurasian families. On the whole BAP tends to accept a
strong correlation between archeology and ethno-linguistics and is mildly
supportive of the ND-YE connection.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper6] The Palatal Series in Athabascan-Eyak-Tlingit, with an
Overview of the Basic Sound Correspondences <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>This section could also be considered a “lead article”. The addition
of palatal(ized) stops increases the already high number of ND proto-phonemes
and tends to make ND yet harder to handle in the Nostratic framework, to which
Amerindian languages will inevitably be integrated in a way or another. It would
therefore be interesting to tackle the distribution of all the phonemes, the
root structure of ND and try to determine potential reductions of the
exceedingly high number of proto-phonemes. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper7] The Concept of Geolinguistic Conservatism in Na-Dene
Prehistory<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>Athabaskan is extraordinarily homogeneous. JK explains this situation
with the typological peculiarities of Athapaskan verb and noun morphologies,
which are also embedded in toponyms. Athapaskan toponyms are nearly always
meaningful and they used to play a major role in (inter-tribal) economy and
wanderings. JK favors a high chronology for ND (much earlier than 8000 BP),
especially in the perspective of external links with Siberian languages like YE.
<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper8] Dene-Yeniseian and Processes of Deep Change in Kin
Terminologies <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>Plain terms like husband, wife, mother, etc. are replaced by symbols,
which makes the whole section unnecessarily hard to read. It is unclear what the
authors really want to say. The section is interesting but somewhat lacks a
linear thread. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>[Paper9] Selecting Separate Episodes of the Peopling of the New
World: Beringian–Subarctic–Eastern North American Folklore Links
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>This section is extremely interesting and tends to show that
comparative mythology shares with historical linguistics a large number of
issues and reasonings among which the dichotomy: diffusion or heritage. It
appears that the usual syntheses involving mainly linguistics, genetics and
archeology overlook the potential input provided by comparative mythology.
Unsurprisingly there is no mythological theme that YE and ND speakers would
specifically share. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>CONCLUSION<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>On the whole the book is extremely interesting to read and contains a
wealth of information. The Dene-Yeniseian connection is in my opinion false but
this should not deter potential readers from looking at the numerous papers
which generally have rich and interesting contents more or less independent from
this connection.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>ABOUT THE REVIEWER<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>Arnaud Fournet, unaffiliated scholar, La Garenne Colombes
(France)<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal
align=left><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US"
lang=EN-US>His research interests include (historical) phonology, descriptive
linguistics and macro-comparison, especially in the Nostratic perimeter.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>