reality of PIE

[Ante Aikio]

On Mon, 14 Feb 2000, petegray wrote:

[someone  wrote:]
>>>> Genetically related languages were once the same language.

> On this, Larry said:

>>The statement above is true ... by definition.

> This begs the question I asked above, and also relies on questions of
> definition - are we talking of a single unifed undifferentiated language?
> That's the concept I am attacking.

The application of the comparative method always gives a single,
homogenous parent language for a group of genetically related
languages. This results from the nature of the method, since it always
derives present heterogenity from earlier homogenity. But the result of
the method must never be accepted as such - it must be interpreted. The
reconstructed proto-language is an idealization, and idealizations should
not be mistaken as reality. I believe no serious linguist would maintain
that the proto-language was in reality completely homogenous (= without
dialect variation).

>   It is not true *by definition* that
> genetically related langauges derive from a single undifferentiated
> ancestor.

Not "undifferentiated", since no natural language is completely
homogenous. Rather, the currently heterogenous state derives from an
earlier, less heterogenous state. And when we go backwards in time, there
will be a point which is homogenous enough to justify the concept of a
single parent language.

 - Ante Aikio