Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Interesting pre-Greek article

From:R A Brown <ray@...>
Date:Monday, September 19, 2005, 10:29
Jeffrey Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 16:09:47 -0400, Roger Mills <rfmilly@...> wrote: > >>I've just started reading this: http://www.ieed.nl/ied/pdf/pre-greek.pdf >> >>which comes from: http://www.ieed.nl/index2.html >> >>compliments of the inimitable gLeN gordon of cybalist >>========================================================================= > > > I could read only the first few pages, but I also noticed the reference to > R.A. Brown (1985 ?)
The date is correct. It is the date that Hakkert of Amsterdam published my M.Litt. thesis under the title "Pre-Greek Speech on Crete" (ISBN 90-256-0876-0)
> > I found the term "Pre-Greek" confusing, though. Some historical linguists > use "Pre-" for the result of Internal Reconstruction as opposed to "Proto- > ", the result of the Comparative Method.
What's the difference? Alto pre- must obviously be used this way by some historical linguists, it seems to me an odd use of pre- which should mean "before". Maybe as an alternative to the Greek "proto-" the German "ur-" could have been adopted?
>While I suspect "Pre-Greek" is > already well-established,
Quite a long time now.
>wouldn't something like "Ante-Greek" have been better for a non-ancestor of Greek?
Trouble is 'ante' too often gets confused with 'anti' (except by Americans who pronounce the two prefixes differently). I was using the term pre-Greek to mean simply "before Greek" some 30 years ago. When did the use of pre- to mean "first early form derived from internal reconstruction" come into use? -- Ray ================================== ray@carolandray.plus.com http://www.carolandray.plus.com ================================== MAKE POVERTY HISTORY