Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!rutgers!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!petrich
From: petrich@netcom.com (Loren Petrich)
Subject: Re: Etruscans [was: Re: The Coming of the Greeks]
Message-ID: <petrichE16Hsx.HKI@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <54q9ou$85o_002@dialin.csus.edu> <56oh14$i2g@fridge-nf0.shore.net> <petrichE142t4.DGu@netcom.com> <56v16i$9cu@fridge-nf0.shore.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 16:58:09 GMT
Lines: 58
Sender: petrich@netcom20.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.archaeology:56273 sci.lang:64600

In article <56v16i$9cu@fridge-nf0.shore.net>,
Steve Whittet <whittet@shore.net> wrote:
>In article <petrichE142t4.DGu@netcom.com>, petrich@netcom.com says...

>You never claimed that linguistic reconstructions are also
>evidence of language? Well, good, I'm glad we cleared that up.

	I DID NOT CLAIM THAT EITHER. Just that some reconstructed 
ancestral language did not simply spring into existence, but also had 
ancestors.

>>Most likely, our species has had language as long as humanity has 
>>existed. Even people in distant parts of the world with Paleolithic-level 
>>technology have had language.

>That does not address the question I asked, unless of course, you 
>want to claim that this language which our species has had as long 
>as humanity has existed is something which always existed in one 
>form unchanging and absolute, ie; the same perfectly proficient 
>form which Ben claims.

	I never claimed that; why don't you study some non-vocabulary 
features, such as phonology and grammar, some time? 

>As Alderson has pointed out in sci.lang, present theories of man's
>evolution have homo erectus dispersing around the globe and then
>homo sapiens evolving independently in many different places such
>as China, Africa, and Java. 

	That's the multiregional theory, which has been seriously 
disputed. An alternative that is IMO more plausible is the "Out of 
Africa" theory, which holds that our present-day species emerged in 
Africa and spread from there all across the globe. It makes the genetics 
of the emergence of our species *much* simpler, since new genes have to 
spread over a *much* smaller population.

>>Mr. Whittet, if you spend 1/10 the time studying historical 
>>linguistics that you spend on archeology, you might actually 
>>*learn* something about this subject.

>You are right to chide me Loren, but where am I to find
>historic evidence of pre-historic linguistics? Other than 
>either looking at archaeological evidence or engaging in the
>sort of speculative reconstructions which you now deny claiming 
>are evidence of the existence of language, can you point me to
>a place where I can go read something in a PIE language for myself?

	At least you show a *little* bit of humility.

>>Why aren't there any language-less stragglers?
>Because language tends to diffuse on contact.

	Even to distant parts of the world?
-- 
Loren Petrich				Happiness is a fast Macintosh
petrich@netcom.com			And a fast train
My home page: http://www.webcom.com/petrich/home.html
Mirrored at: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/pe/petrich/home.html


