IE "Urheimat" and evidence from Uralic linguistics

[JoatSimeon at aol.com]

>X99Lynx at aol.com writes:

>Betraying my ignorance, I must once again ask why this exchange must have
>happened with PIE and not with an early daughter.

-- because if it was early enough for these word forms, it would BE the PIE
language.

>PIE originates just south of where Uralic originates?

-- yes.

>So that Uralic did not expand south because PIE speakers were already there?

-- the Uralic languages were, and mostly remained, languages of the forest
zone north of the steppe and forest-steppe of the Pontic zone.  They remained
predominant there until historic times, when Slavic replaced them.

>Or is the assertion that they were all once one language and perhaps
>this wasn't borrowing at all.

-- no.  They're very distinct languages.