Re: Conlangs on based Slavic languages...etc

Joe scripsit:

> PIE is defined in terms of the IE language family, not the other way around.
The point is that at the time Hittite was deciphered and discovered
to be related to the IE languages, we already had a fairly well
established notion labeled "PIE".  It was fairly clear that Hittite was
quite different from the hitherto known IE languages, and some people
believed that incorporating it into the PIE reconstruction would create
an entirely different proto-language.  Labeling this new proto-language
"PIE" as well would cause nothing but confusion, so the new name
"Indo-Hittite" was proposed for it.  This is exactly what was done
when the aboriginal languages of Taiwan were found to be related to the
existing Malayo-Polynesian family: a new top-level name "Austronesian"
was introduced, covering both Malayo-Polynesian and the Formosan
(Taiwanese) languages.  (PIE drools, PAN rules.  Happy now, Roger?)

In the end, Hittite hasn't had that much of an effect on PIE, and most
IE-ists simply use the null hypothesis that it is one more branch much
like the rest.  The cladistic work at UPenn, however, which is focused
on finding binary branching points, does identify Hittite as maximally
distinct from the other IE languages -- but the identification rests on
a single characteristic.


--
Knowledge studies others / Wisdom is self-known;      John Cowan
Muscle masters brothers / Self-mastery is bone;       jcowan@reutershealth.com
Content need never borrow / Ambition wanders blind;   www.ccil.org/~cowan
Vitality cleaves to the marrow / Leaving death behind.    --Tao 33 (Bynner)

Reply