Saturday, August 12, 2017

Why Creationists should Not Believe IE Single Protolanguage


Very simple. The same arguments which lead to an IE* protolanguage, with that interpretation of facts, will also lead to a proto-language before both Proto-IE and Proto-Uralic, or even Proto-Ural-Altaic.

  Greek  Finnish
I   -(ον)   -en
thou   -εις   -et
he/she   -ει   -ee
we   -ομεν   -eme
ye   -ετε   -ete
they   -ουσι   -evat


For "I", Greek needs another tense. For "they" the endings are different. For "he/she", the match is considered as accidental. For "thou" we have a half-good match, but for "we" and "ye" we have excellent matches.

However, Greek is IE, inside IE language family, thought to descend from Proto-IE, PIE. Finnish is Uralic, outside IE language family, thought NOT to descend from PIE. The kind of motives leading mainstream linguists (but not Trubetskoy, founder of Balkan linguistics) to accept IE group as descending from a single language are the kind of motives leading logically to accept this and Uralic had an even older common Proto-language, explaining why Finnish and Greek have so similar verb endings.

Present day Slavonic languages, as well as Germanic ones, have a verb tense system closer to Finnish than to more typically IE ones, like Greek, Latin, Sanskrit. Old Bulgarian or Church Slavonic is known to be different, but could have picked up some categories from Greek - while living close to it on Balkan.

The other idea explaining commonalities - and which would explain Finnish ones without involving an even older Proto-language - is mutual loans while languages are neighbours in a restricted geographic area. And if the spread out from Babel was gradual, that is also what we can expect.

This would also explain instant sound changes applied to words when switching from a language to another./HGL

*Indo-European.

Read Today About GT


Modified human crania from Göbekli Tepe provide evidence for a new form of Neolithic skull cult
Julia Gresky, Juliane Haelm and Lee Clare
Science Advances 28 Jun 2017:
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/6/e1700564.full


Citing:

Against the background of available archaeological and ethnographic evidence, two interpretations of the carved skulls from Göbekli Tepe are presented. These interpretations are connected to ancestor veneration or the display of dispatched enemies through either active “branding” of individuals or functional modification of the skull for display.


I second the latter interpretation : display of dispatched enemies.

If my own theory of Göbekli Tepe is correct, the thousand carbonic years represent 40 actual years and a rapid rise in carbon 14 content. It is the traditionally 40 years of Babel, described in Genesis 11.

In Genesis 10 you find Nimrod described as a "mighty hunter before the Lord". Tradition adds he was a manhunter, he was heading Babel project, it lasted 40 years of building effort before dispersion of nations through confusion of tongues.

And I guess the enemies were simply shirkers, Nimrod was showing his skill as a "manhunter" or "headhunter"./HGL

PS, if you know about Rosemary Kennedy, you might know what I mean there could have been a recent pre-mortem incision. In terrorem./HGL