Conseguenze delle nuove teorie indoeuropeistiche sulla dialettologia romanza

The study of Romance dialects, as well as the historical linguistics of all the Indo-European languages of Europe, is strictly dependent on the chronological picture hypothesised for the origins of IE. Given that today the conclusions drawn from the traditional IE theory based on the assumption of a Great Invasion during the Chalcolithic era have not simply been placed into doubt but are considered completely unacceptable by archaeology, it is necessary to take into consideration the consequences that two new alternative theories about IE Renfrews theory of Neolithic Dispersal and the theory of Continuity by Otte, Häusler and this author have on the study of Romance dialects

Conseguenze delle nuove teorie indoeuropeistiche sulla dialettologia romanza

The study of Romance dialects, as well as the historical linguistics of all the Indo-European languages of Europe, is strictly dependent on the chronological picture hypothesised for the origins of IE. Given that today the conclusions drawn from the traditional IE theory —based on the assumption of a Great Invasion during the Chalcolithic era— have not simply been placed into doubt but are considered completely unacceptable by archaeology, it is necessary to take into consideration the consequences that two new alternative theories about IE —Renfrew's theory of Neolithic Dispersal and the theory of Continuity by Otte, Häusler and this author— have on the study of Romance dialects

Linguistica storica e reificazione de linguaggio in margine a un articolo-recensione di Adiego

In this reply to the criticisms Adiego made to the first volume of my Origins of European Languages I reaffirm my principle theories, which are: (1) the «static condition» is the only law of language, and linguistic change is exclusively due to external forces; (2) even the linguistic mutations that Adiego attributes to organic causes (those analogic, syntactic and of grammaticalisation) are clearly the result of external causes; (3) lexical self-dating is a valid tool; (4) the common IE is located in the Palaeolithic; (5) the Neolithic terms that traditional theory attributes to PIE, such as the names of ¿wool¿ and ¿sheep,¿ are borrowed; (6) dialects and some of their typical features are already present in the Latin era and could have contributed to the formation of Latin. My conclusion is that Adiego¿s vision is inspired by an eighteenth century ¿reification¿ of language and motivated by the search for an impossible compromise between myth and science