Print

Print


Quoting "Thomas R. Wier" <[log in to unmask]>:

> Quoting John Cowan <[log in to unmask]>:
>
> > Mark J. Reed scripsit:
> >
> > > Okay, my goal is to design a family of languages that all descend
> > > from PIE, but have been completely isolated from all other
> > > members of that family for the past few tens of millennia
> >
> > The time depth of PIE is only about 6000 years.
>
> This is by no means universally accepted, though it is the currently
> reigning orthodoxy.  In particular, those who advocate an Anatolian
> Urheimat, such as Colin Renfrew, usually claim an age of somewhere
> between 7,000 and 9,000 years B.P., when agriculture was spreading
> out of Anatolia into Europe and elsewhere. One of the key pieces of
> evidence usually cited in favor of the orthodox age is the fact that
> a PIE root for "wheel" can be reconstructed, and no wheels have been
> discovered earlier than about 6,000 years B.P.

I, a while ago, saw a web-page, by that glottalic theory guy whose name begins
in G- and ends in -dze, which presented a scenario in which the real Urheimat
was in eastern Anatolia and/or southern Caucasia, but after the splitting off
of Anatolian, Greek and Armenian, the remainder went north to the steppelands
N or NE of the Black Sea, where they eventually broke up into the other
branches. Possibly Indo-Iranian was supposed to have broken off before
crossing the Caucasus - can't recall.

Not being an IEist, to me this seems to nicely combine both the "Orthodox"
and "Anatolian" ideas on the Urheimat. What does the list's IE sages say?

                                                    Andreas