[INDOLOGY] Heggarty et al. 2023, "Language trees with sampled ancestors support a hybrid model for the origin of Indo-European languages" - reactions?

[Martin Joachim Kümmel]

While there is still a slight possibility that the Anatolian horse words might not be inherited (until we find attestations of Hittite *ekku-), it is clear that horses must have been known to speakers of PIE but the linguistic evidence is not sufficient to be sure of domestication in the protolanguage itself.
For me as one author of the study, the biggest problem has remained the surprisingly early date for the divergence of Indo-Iranic but it should not be forgotten that the median age (5520 B. P.) highlighted in the article is just one possibility, and the range of probable dates (HPD) is much larger, from 4535-6796. Assuming the beginning of first dialectal differences (and this is what this approach models) around 2600 BC could agree with a final splitup around 2000 so that cultural innovations like the chariot could be (or look like) inherited in all subbranches.
I admit that I also suspect there might be a systematic problem in the methodology applied to ancient languages, possibly leading to exaggerated estimations of vocabulary differences but this needs to be worked out in detail – now that we have a much better database. And of course, the results should be cross-checked with data from other linguistic levels, not just lexicon where the danger of undetected borrowings is highest.
I hope the new study will help to find possible problems in phylogenetic modelling not simply due to bad data.

All best wishes,
Martin

Von: INDOLOGY <indology-bounces at list.indology.info> Im Auftrag von Asko Parpola via INDOLOGY
Gesendet: Montag, 21. August 2023 08:48
An: Hock, Hans Henrich <hhhock at illinois.edu>
Cc: Dominik <domlaguna at gmail.com>; Indology <indology at list.indology.info>
Betreff: Re: [INDOLOGY] Heggarty et al. 2023, "Language trees with sampled ancestors support a hybrid model for the origin of Indo-European languages" - reactions?

Horse was a very important game animal in the steppe region from Neolithic times, and it is depicted already in the Khvalynsk culture, from which the Yamnaya culture is derived. Horse domestication followed later - it was necessary for the use of  chariots first evidenced in southern Trans-Urals in the Sintashta culture (2000-1900 BCE), which is very likely to be Proto-Indo-Iranian in language. Horse is likely to have been domesticated earlier than this in the steppe region, and kept for meat, milk and transport (as a pack-animal) but so far there is no clear evidence for its use for riding before c. 2100 in Mesopotamia. As one of the main hunted animals, very swift (āśu : aśva), its name must have been present in the early predecessors of Proto-Indo-European.

The splendid Majkop culture (c 4000-3000 BCE) of North Caucasus appears to represent a fusion of steppe culture (probably Early PIE in language) and culture of the Caucasus and the south up to Mesopotamia. Caucasus became a crucial source of metal for the steppe area after invaders from the steppe had largely destroyed the farming cultures of  the Balkans and their metal industry c. 4500 BCE.

Best regards and wishes, Asko


On 21. Aug 2023, at 5.53, Hock, Hans Henrich via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info<mailto:indology at list.indology.info>> wrote:

My initial concern is that the date and time posited for PIE does not square with the evidence of horse domestication and the reconstructed PIE word for horse, reflexes of which are found in all branches. The paper does not even discuss this issue.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20230824/c93a6a0a/attachment.htm>