Bandkeramik and non-Anatolian PIE

[JoatSimeon at aol.com]

>X99Lynx at aol.com writes:

 I wrote:

 >(and possibly proto-Phrygian-Thracian, though don't hold me to that.)

 JoatSimeon at aol.com wrote:

 >-- good thing you added the qualifier, since Phrygian shows close links to
 >Greek and none in particular to Anatolian.

>Once again, I'll have to ask you what SPECIFIC links you are talking about.
>>From all I know, Phrygian doesn't show much of anything and its evidence is
>about a 1000 years later than Luwian and Hittite.

-- once again, I'll have to refer you to the literature on the subject.  I
can't teach you comparative philology, even to the meagre extent I've
absorbed it.

If you want a few examples...

...there's the retention of the augment -- eg., "edaes", "he put", from PIE
*h(1)edeh(1), 'he put', a feature Phrygian shares with Greek, Armenian and
Indo-Iranian; this is usually considered a late innovation shared by the
southeastern dialect group of PIE.

Features shared by Phrygian and Greek include the relative pronoun *ios, the
suffix *-meno, the pronoun *auto-, the use of the ending *-s in the
nominative singular masculine of a-stems, and the augment (mentioned above).

There's a Phrygian inscription on the tomb of King Midas:  "Midai lavagtaei
vanaktei", "To Midas the War-leader and King".

This contains two terms shared with (Mycenaean) Greek:  lawagetas and wannax
("war-leader" and "king", respectively.)

>It may even be only understood by only one person.

-- since you're very much in the minority here, that's a rather odd remark.