Talk:Graeco-Aryan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

[edit] Comments

Linguistic evidence? 惑乱 分からん 01:22, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Such language never existed. We can only speak about Proto-Italo-Greek language (Centum language), i.e. proto-language of Latin and Greak languages on one PIE branch and Proto-Indo-Balto-Slavic language (Satem language) on other branch. The proto-cognate of Celtic languages is under question, but most likely there was Proto-Italo-Graeco-Celtic language (Centum language). Roberts7 20:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, there's no evidence for "Proto-Satem" either, and least of all for "Proto-Centum" (considering Tocharian and Hittite were centum as well!). —Angr 19:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but then one must admit that the PIE is also very hypothetical language which is mainly reconstructed on phonetical basis of Greek language (what's not correct, imho, because Sanskrit (Vedic) is phonetically older) and grammatical basis of Classical Sanskrit, the older Vedic Sanskrit grammar is simply ignored. So reconstructed PIE actually is Proto-Italo-Graeco-Celtic language (romanized/greekized Sanskrit language) not PIE. Speaking about Proto-Satem, of course there are some problems of Proto-Satem reconstruction which concern PIE g' and k' development (Sanskrit & Lithuanian š /ž (< č /), Iranian, Slavic & other Baltic s /z (< ts /dz)). But then we cannot speak about Proto-Indo-Iranian, Proto-Baltic and Proto-Balto-Slavic languages either. Roberts7 12:21, 8 April 2007 (UTC)