LL-L: "Celtic connections" LOWLANDS-L, 27.OCT.1999 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L Administrator]

 ========================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 27.OCT.1999 (03) * ISSN 1089-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/~sassisch/rhahn//lowlands/>
 User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 =========================================================================
 A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
 =========================================================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 =========================================================================

From: Christian Chiarcos [myrddin at cs.tu-berlin.de]
Subject: LL-L: "Celtic connections" LOWLANDS-L, 26.OCT.1999 (03) [E]
> From: Ian James Parsley [parsley at highbury.fsnet.co.uk]
> The reason I used that particular example was I studied the Morrish/Lees
> "lexicostatics" hypothesis last year, which in fact I disproved in my
> undergraduate dissertation by applying to German strong verbs. It states,
> according to agreements in the vocabulary of 100 core words, that English
> and French could have split from each other no earlier than 1000BC, when the

> accepted date is at least 500 years before that. (It also states,
> incidentally, that German split up more recently from Danish than it did
> from English, something we KNOW to be completely false!).

Italic and Proto-Germanic/-Celtic lost their contact when the Italics invaded
Italy, i.e. not after the 13th c.BC.

> PIE "split up into different dialects, which
> >became unintelligible (i.e. incomprehensible) from each other, probably
some
> >time in the second millennium BCE, as tribes moved to new areas and came
> >into contact with new things."
>
> Now I'm no HEL expert but following various books, I teach that the IE
> diaspora began about 5000 BC (though I do recall seeing one book which put
> it at a much earlier date).  However, if we assume that both my 5000 and
> Ian's 2000 are correct, does this not raise some queries.  During those
> first three thousand years, were all those IE speakers mutually
> comprehensible?  My own assumption is that given the nature of language
> change and the movement of peoples some degree of incomprehensibility must
> have been present much earlier than 2000 BC.

Basicly there are two different theories about the original archaeological
background
of the PIE tribes. It seems accepted by most writers that they are presented
by
the
so-called Kurgan-cultures (German also Ockergrabkulturen, a later stage
Schnurkeramische
Kulturen), whose origin already lies in the 4th m.BC and finally spread out
across
all over
the Caucasian territory, the Balkan, Middle Europe, Middle Asia and Sibiria
during
the
3rd m. BC.
The further origin of the Kurgan Culture is unknown. The first stage seems to
be
represented
by a group in the western territory of the Tripol'e Culture (Bandkeramischer
Kreis). So two
theories about IE origin developed. The most common in Eastern Europe was that

autochthon
tribes (with PIE language) were influenced by non-PIE speakers represented in
the
Balkan
cultures. A usual western European theory was (and is) to declare the Balkan
cultures as
Indo-European and in this way trace back the Indo-Europeans to Anatolia. This
would offer
a good explanation of the Indo-Aryan - Greek-connection.
But: then the split has to be seen much earlier, very much.

In my personal opinion the Indo-Europeans are autochthon inhabitants of the
north
Pontian
territory, not Anatolia, because there are only very few traces of direct
contact
between the
Semitic and Indo-European group, and the only known IE languages of Anatolia
can
be
traced back to movements from the Caucas since the end of the 3rd m. BC.
By the other hand, the first of them, the Hitties seem to have divided the
original Caucasian-
Anatolian groups (Diakonoff), that shows that they are late invaders.

The few traces mentioned are mostly:
(western) IE. *tawr-os, sem. taw "bull" (Georgian god Tar-on)
IE. *agr-os, sum. agar, ugar, sem. Ugar-it, egypt. aker "land (for
agriculture);
village"
Possibly the different forms familar with German "Gerste" have Semitic
cognates,
maybe
a name for copper belongs here, maybe the Akkadian pilakku "axe", too.

Another one is IE. *ag- "to move" is familar with Urarto-Hurritian *ag- "lead,

move".

There are some more, but all are connected with agriculture or manufactoring,
in
my opinion
they show mainly that the PIE. hunter-nomads came in contact with a higher
developed
culture (in contact with Semitic languages, too), and adoped different
technical
methods and
the names therefore. This seems to have happened rather in Eastern Europe than
in
Anatolia.

greetings
christian chiarcos

PS:
This seems to be no plausible topic for that list !

==================================END======================================
 * Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
   to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
 =========================================================================