The UPenn IE Tree (the stem)

[X99Lynx at aol.com]

In a message dated 9/9/99 1:20:32 AM, maxdashu at LanMinds.Com wrote:
<<I doubt that any human language ever existed that has not innovated over
time.>>

I do too.  But "non-innovating" has a very limited meaning here.

The Stammbaum cannot possibly claim to represent all the innovations in all
of the IE languages it includes.

The "nodes" represent certain specific innovations.  The "non-innovating"
language that is assumed in the Stammbaum is only "non-innovating" as to that
limited group of innovations.  Otherwise, that language could be quite
innovative, I suppose.

I wrote:
<<The only node on that tree that represents a non-innovating language is
marked PIE.  And this tree also posits a group of speakers who are always
non-innovators, node after node.  And because they are not the innovators,
they remain PIE.  Right down to the last node.  Unless of course they are the
last node.>>

This is a fair read I believe of what the Stammbaum must assume for it to
make any sense.  The Stammbaum posits a "non-innovating" language.  But to be
fair, again , the description non-innovating only would only apply to the
small circle of "innovations" covered by the Stammbaum.

Regards,
Steve Long