Re: Proto-Uralic?
| From: | Markus Miekk-oja <fam.miekk-oja@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Monday, June 30, 2003, 13:51 |
|---|
> >I have also seen pages where it is claimed that Proto-Uralic never
> >existed, but rather that Uralic was a convergence area. Apparently,
> >the field is less developed than IE historical linguistics, which might
Convergence area? Do you mean a tight-knit spraachbund-like thing, which
split before total "convergence" had been reached? sounds like a nifty
method of explaining conlang-"families" with inexplainable irregular
derivations... =)
Reply