SV: [Re: On substratum religion]

[Walker Trimble]

>Excuse me, but isn't this a trifle too simple? As for mother goddesses, I
would assume them to be something of an "archetype" since mothers are to be
found everywhere. They do not necessarily have to be a substrate in
Indo-European. But substrates DO exist, both in language and in culture.
Mixing up Aryan Romanticism and the substrate idea in general as it is done
here, seems quite misguided.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Lars Martin Fosse

My point is exactly that it is all a bit too simple.  Too simple, for
example, to view all male divinities as of the hegemonic group,
"superstratum," and all female divinities as in the substratum.  Too simple
to view all retroflex consonants as Dravidian and all palatals as
Indo-European.  I would argue, in fact, that it is not misguided, but a
categorical imperative to view the "substrate" idea as the apposite of
Aryan Romanticism.  This does not mean that substrates do not exist.  But
we have to be careful and not use them as a kind of compost pile in which
all things that seem not to fit into the dominant, recorded culture are
heaped.

W. Trimble