Bandkeramik and non-Anatolian PIE

[JoatSimeon at aol.com]

>X99Lynx at aol.com writes:

>First you say that Greek is intrusive than you say Hittite must be intrusive
>because it is not related to Greek.

-- no, I said Hittite is intrusive in Anatolia. This is obvious due to the
very large set of loan-words from Hattic, the non-IE language originally
spoken in the Halys area, and the nature of those loan-words.  It's been a
standard interpretation for a long time.

The implications of Hittite's lack of close relationship with Greek is
another matter.

>Well, then my explantion is either Hittite's intrusive or Greek's intrusive
>and that's why they don't have to be closely related.

-- if you're arguing that the IE languages spread from east to west, Anatolia
to Greece and then to the Balkans, then logically Greek and Hittite ought to
be closely related, and Greek and say, Latin (still more Sanskrit or
Balto-Slavic) distantly related.  Whereas precisely the opposite is the case.

And Renfrew does claim that Greek is the result of development _in situ_, at
least in his original book.

>That makes NO sense.

-- correct.  However, since this argument existed nowhere but in your mind...
8-).

>So Greek proves nothing about Hittite's lack of intrusiveness.

-- where did you get the idea that I said it did?

>I know this is a waste of time, but what SPECIFIC internal relationships are
>you talking about?  What SPECIFIC links would you expect?

-- here's where we get to the stuff about Hittite and Greek.  You know,
morphology and so forth?  Greek lacks the specific isoglosses which define
the Anatolian group of IE languages (eg., loss of grammatical gender).  Greek
has specific isoglosses which it shares with Indo-Iranian (eg., retention of
the augment).

(Note:  since you seem to have trouble with the concept of "example", I will
specify that these are not the _only_ common features of these languages --
these are just single _examples_.)

>And what do you mean by other IE languages?  I know you won't answer any of
>these, but I'll ask anyway.

-- Greek, Balto-Slavic, Tocharian, Germanic, Italic, Celtic, Indo-Iranian.

>What do you think Hittite is closely related to?

-- Luwian and Palaic in its own time; Lycian and the others later.  Not,
however, to Phrygian or Armenian.

You see, the Anatolian languages -- Hittite, Luwian, etc. -- are subfamily,
like the Romance or Germanic or Indo-Iranian.

>In your last post, you have the entire Ukraine and maybe even the Balkans
>occupied by a Greek-Sanskrit-Armenian dialectical continum. You have
>Anatolia completely encircled.

-- here I must refer you to a map.  That puts PIE north of Anatolia, and
separated by the Black Sea, the Balkans, and the Caucasus mountains.

>So where do you think Hittite came from?

-- same place as the rest, only rather earlier.  The first wave in a series.
Given the predominantly non-IE population of eastern Anatolia and most of
transcaucasia at the earliest recorded periods, probably although not
certainly from the west, via the Bosphorus.  Sometime after 3500 BCE, but
before 2000 BCE (the latter being a _terminus ad quem_ because of the
Anatolian-IE names recorded by Assyrian merchants about that date).  Not too
much earlier than 2000 BCE, because of the -- here's that term again --
degree of differentiation shown by the Anatolian languages when we get some
written records of them, around 500 years after the Assyrian _karum_ tablets.

>My read on this is that "PIE minus Anatolian" forms on the Danube and becomes
>Bandkeramik.  The predecessor "Anatolian-Balkan painted pottery" culture
>found in the Balkans and Anatolia represents the residue of 'wide PIE' AFTER
>the split and would include proto-Hittite-Luwian...>>

-- and so all these languages vanished, except a couple in central Anatolia.
Hmmm.
Convenient, eh?  And non-falsifiable.