...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
IAM population, Natufians, Proto-Semitic, North African Component
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ That's why I'm suspicious about the way some of these African languages are classified. I'd say Nilo-Saharan is roughly equivalent to say Altai-Siberian or [URL=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altaic_languages]Altaic[/URL] phylum in Asia. I always took it for granted that these Western linguists were accurate as accurate in their assessments as they were with Indo-European, so imagine my surprise some years ago when I found out how tenuous the construct was. [And yes I knew Korean, Japanese, and definitely Ainu were not included] However I always thought Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic were more genetically related than I thought. In regards to African linguistics, Christopher Ehret's specialty is Afroasiatic which all linguists agree is a true genetic phylum. I'm not saying that Nilo-Saharan is not a true genetic phylum, but as you Brandon stated some linguists who are not a accurate are quick to group isolates in there due to apparently superficial features. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3