Celtic's rate of differentiation

[X99Lynx at aol.com]

I wrote:
<<And there is nothing in what Renfrew wrote that precludes the Celtic
languages from first developing as such at any particular time - even in
250BC.>>

In a message dated 2/2/00 12:43:52 PM, JoatSimeon at aol.com wrote:
<<-- developing FROM WHAT?  From PIE?  Is PIE supposed to have been around in
250 BCE for the Celtic languages to develop from?>>.

You have no problem with proto-Latin arising among the other Italic languages
before 500BC, wiping out those other languages and giving rise to modern
Romance languages 2500 years later.

But you do have a problem with proto-Celtic arising among related languages
before 800BC, wiping out those related languages and giving rise to the
Celtic languages 1000 years later.

Does that make any sense?  And now who's the one who isn't applying a
'scientific' uniformity to prehistoric languages.

Obviously, a lot could have gone on between Renfrew's 'an early indo-european
language' and the rise of an identifiable Celtic.  There could have been
plenty of languages and dialects that developed in between.  I don't think I
need to tell you that the chances are that any IE languages in 4000BC
wouldn't have had writing - but as you say with migrations - it doesn't mean
they weren't there.

There may have been many ancestor languages that preceeded Celtic before
Celtic arose.  THERE IS NOTHING THAT SAYS THAT A STRING OF ANCESTRAL
LANGUAGES CAN'T SEPARATE NON-ANATOLIAN PIE FROM CELTIC.

The only thing that prevents it is your "degree of differentiation"
calculator.  Which we are still waiting to see.

<<That's the whole POINT here.  The time-gaps are ridiculous!  As is the
geographic spread. You do not GET uniform languages over large areas.>>

Nobody said anything about the languages staying uniform over any great
period of time.  You are simply not comprehending that there is no
requirement that Celtic come directly out of PIE - any more than that modern
Greek came directly out of PIE.

<<The IE languages when first encountered are NOT DIFFERENTIATED ENOUGH to
have been separated by that depth of time!>>

NOT DIFFERENTIATED ENOUGH?  HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?  Oh, I forget the amazing
"degree of differentiation = separation in years" calculator.  What a boon
that will be to historical science.  Are you going to have it co-calibrated
with tree rings?

Regards,
Steve Long