PIE vs. Proto-World (Proto-Language)

Rick Mc Callister rmccalli at sunmuw1.MUW.Edu
Tue Aug 3 17:43:48 UTC 1999

[ moderator re-formatted ]

>Rick said:
>>. DNA studies obtensibly show that non-African
>> humans seem to go back a single population distinct from Africans.

>"Distinct" from Africans?   Not in my reading of the texts.  I don't wish to
>raise a non-linguistic topic, but your implication - that languages split
>into African and non-African - is a language topic, and we need some
>scientist out there to give us the DNA truth.


	Distinct in the sense that, according to what I read in New
Scientist, Scientific American, etc., non-African [modern human]
populations began leaving Africa about 100,000 BP. If language was
developed before 100,000 BP --and my understanding is that this is the
consensus, then these languages would seem to have a common origin in
	How they are related to existing African families is another
question. I believe they probably are. But given that the origin of
language in Africa has not been dated, this is the most difficult aspect to
account for in any scenario of monogenesis. But given that, if one includes
AA, there are 3 African language families plus the Khoisan languages, this
narrows things down quite a bit.
	Any division between African and non-African languages would be
clouded by the question of Afro-Asiatic and the possibility of other
languages coming out of Africa and non-African languages going back into
Africa. On the face of it, non-African languages would seem to have entered
Asia from the relative small Red Sea area
	I'm not claiming that there wasn't any genetic flow between Africa
and the rest of the world. There obviously was.
	Another consideration is that it is indeed possible that language
was invented BEFORE modern humans arose, in which case, monogenesis would
be the only obvious conclusion.

Rick Mc Callister
Mississippi University for Women
Columbus MS 39701

More information about the Indo-european mailing list