What language was spoken in East Asia before Proto-Turkic?Was there a Semitic influence on Proto-Germanic?What language came before Proto-Indo-European?Are all languages related?What did the Greeks and Romans believe about language relationships?Origins of Turkic language family? Alternatives to Altaic?What were the pre-Arabic Turkic words used for greeting?Which Indo European language best preserves the features of Proto Indo-European?If speech language was before written language, isn't non verbal before speech?When was Proto-Italic spoken?From which language was the Finnish word for “language” derived?
All of my Firefox add-ons been disabled suddenly, how can I re-enable them?
Where did Lovecraft write about Carcosa?
Emergency stop in plain TeX, pdfTeX, XeTeX and LuaTeX?
Explaining intravenous drug abuse to a small child
How do I, as a DM, handle a party that decides to set up an ambush in a dungeon?
While drilling into kitchen wall, hit a wire - any advice?
What is more safe for browsing the web: PC or smartphone?
As a GM, is it bad form to ask for a moment to think when improvising?
Which version of the Squat Nimbleness feat is correct?
Why is the blank symbol not considered part of the input alphabet of a Turing machine?
Subnumcases as a part of align
What does the copyright in a dissertation protect exactly?
TIP120 Transistor + Solenoid Failing Randomly
HSA - Continue to Invest?
How do I download programs on Linux?
Convert Numbers To Emoji Math
Is there a reason why Turkey took the Balkan territories of the Ottoman Empire, instead of Greece or another of the Balkan states?
Can anyone identify this unknown 1988 PC card from The Palantir Corporation?
How important are good looking people in a novel/story?
My large rocket is still flipping over
How is Pauli's exclusion principle still valid in these cases?
What are the requirements for a river delta to form?
Transistor gain, what if there is not enough current?
How is trade in services conducted under the WTO in the absence of the Doha conclusion?
What language was spoken in East Asia before Proto-Turkic?
Was there a Semitic influence on Proto-Germanic?What language came before Proto-Indo-European?Are all languages related?What did the Greeks and Romans believe about language relationships?Origins of Turkic language family? Alternatives to Altaic?What were the pre-Arabic Turkic words used for greeting?Which Indo European language best preserves the features of Proto Indo-European?If speech language was before written language, isn't non verbal before speech?When was Proto-Italic spoken?From which language was the Finnish word for “language” derived?
From Wikipedia we have:
The Proto-Turkic language is the linguistic reconstruction of the
common ancestor of the Turkic languages that was spoken by the
Proto-Turks before their divergence into the various Turkic peoples.
Proto-Turkic separated into Oghur (western) and Common Turkic
(eastern) branches. One estimate postulates Proto-Turkic to have been
spoken 2,500 years ago in East Asia.
- Which language did the ancestors of Proto-Turks speak?
- If they spoke scythian (an Iranian language) then why did they shift
to proto-Turkic? - Notice that I'm not questioning assimilation done by a nomadic group
to other groups, I'm questioning about the very first beginning of a
new language family. A new language family does not pop up through Spontaneous generation in vacuum. How do linguists and anthropologists explain it?
historical-linguistics indo-european language-families turkic-languages indo-aryan
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
add a comment |
From Wikipedia we have:
The Proto-Turkic language is the linguistic reconstruction of the
common ancestor of the Turkic languages that was spoken by the
Proto-Turks before their divergence into the various Turkic peoples.
Proto-Turkic separated into Oghur (western) and Common Turkic
(eastern) branches. One estimate postulates Proto-Turkic to have been
spoken 2,500 years ago in East Asia.
- Which language did the ancestors of Proto-Turks speak?
- If they spoke scythian (an Iranian language) then why did they shift
to proto-Turkic? - Notice that I'm not questioning assimilation done by a nomadic group
to other groups, I'm questioning about the very first beginning of a
new language family. A new language family does not pop up through Spontaneous generation in vacuum. How do linguists and anthropologists explain it?
historical-linguistics indo-european language-families turkic-languages indo-aryan
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
1
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
2
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08
add a comment |
From Wikipedia we have:
The Proto-Turkic language is the linguistic reconstruction of the
common ancestor of the Turkic languages that was spoken by the
Proto-Turks before their divergence into the various Turkic peoples.
Proto-Turkic separated into Oghur (western) and Common Turkic
(eastern) branches. One estimate postulates Proto-Turkic to have been
spoken 2,500 years ago in East Asia.
- Which language did the ancestors of Proto-Turks speak?
- If they spoke scythian (an Iranian language) then why did they shift
to proto-Turkic? - Notice that I'm not questioning assimilation done by a nomadic group
to other groups, I'm questioning about the very first beginning of a
new language family. A new language family does not pop up through Spontaneous generation in vacuum. How do linguists and anthropologists explain it?
historical-linguistics indo-european language-families turkic-languages indo-aryan
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
From Wikipedia we have:
The Proto-Turkic language is the linguistic reconstruction of the
common ancestor of the Turkic languages that was spoken by the
Proto-Turks before their divergence into the various Turkic peoples.
Proto-Turkic separated into Oghur (western) and Common Turkic
(eastern) branches. One estimate postulates Proto-Turkic to have been
spoken 2,500 years ago in East Asia.
- Which language did the ancestors of Proto-Turks speak?
- If they spoke scythian (an Iranian language) then why did they shift
to proto-Turkic? - Notice that I'm not questioning assimilation done by a nomadic group
to other groups, I'm questioning about the very first beginning of a
new language family. A new language family does not pop up through Spontaneous generation in vacuum. How do linguists and anthropologists explain it?
historical-linguistics indo-european language-families turkic-languages indo-aryan
historical-linguistics indo-european language-families turkic-languages indo-aryan
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
1212
1
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
2
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08
add a comment |
1
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
2
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08
1
1
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
2
2
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
As for the title question, the answer would be "many languages, including proto-Chinese". Focusing on the question in the body, the language spoken by the historical ancestors of proto-Turks, there are two main options. One is that they spoke "pre-proto-Turkic", that is, an undocumented language whose properties are not presently recoverable. As for the name of that language, just as we don't know what ethnonym the proto-Indo-Europeans had for themselves (or the proto-Turks), we don't know what name the 10-generation before ancestors of the Turks or Indo-Europeans had for themselves. I should point out that there has been a theory that Mongolian, Tungusic and Turkic are themselves derives from an Altaic proto-language, but that hypothesis is now rejected by most linguists working in the area. Still, it could turn out that there actually is some unproven relationship between Turkic and some other language group.
An alternative would be that the individuals who constitute the majority of the speakers of the language reconstructable as "proto-Turkic" descended from people who switched languages from something else to proto-Turkic. For example, perhaps those people were Scythians, but for some political reason switched language to proto-Turkic. This has happened many times in world history, for example the ancestors of current Arabic speakers in a number of countries originally spoke Nilo-Saharan or Berber languages (among others), but for political reasons adopted Arabic. But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario, lacking in compelling historical support in the present case.
So the answer would be "pre-proto-Turkic", which means "whatever language preceded proto-Turkic". No new language family was started, instead, "proto-Turkic" refers to the limit of our ability to reconstruct languages. It may be sensible to talk of new families when dealing with daughter languages of a credible proto-language, such as Germanic or Italic in relation to Indo-European where we can say that the properties of PIE changed one way to give Proto-Germanic vs. another way to give proto-Italic. Until we find evidence of some lost sister of proto-Turkic, we have no reason to speak of "developing a new language family".
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.8k12471
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
Apr 28 at 15:40
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "312"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31277%2fwhat-language-was-spoken-in-east-asia-before-proto-turkic%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
As for the title question, the answer would be "many languages, including proto-Chinese". Focusing on the question in the body, the language spoken by the historical ancestors of proto-Turks, there are two main options. One is that they spoke "pre-proto-Turkic", that is, an undocumented language whose properties are not presently recoverable. As for the name of that language, just as we don't know what ethnonym the proto-Indo-Europeans had for themselves (or the proto-Turks), we don't know what name the 10-generation before ancestors of the Turks or Indo-Europeans had for themselves. I should point out that there has been a theory that Mongolian, Tungusic and Turkic are themselves derives from an Altaic proto-language, but that hypothesis is now rejected by most linguists working in the area. Still, it could turn out that there actually is some unproven relationship between Turkic and some other language group.
An alternative would be that the individuals who constitute the majority of the speakers of the language reconstructable as "proto-Turkic" descended from people who switched languages from something else to proto-Turkic. For example, perhaps those people were Scythians, but for some political reason switched language to proto-Turkic. This has happened many times in world history, for example the ancestors of current Arabic speakers in a number of countries originally spoke Nilo-Saharan or Berber languages (among others), but for political reasons adopted Arabic. But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario, lacking in compelling historical support in the present case.
So the answer would be "pre-proto-Turkic", which means "whatever language preceded proto-Turkic". No new language family was started, instead, "proto-Turkic" refers to the limit of our ability to reconstruct languages. It may be sensible to talk of new families when dealing with daughter languages of a credible proto-language, such as Germanic or Italic in relation to Indo-European where we can say that the properties of PIE changed one way to give Proto-Germanic vs. another way to give proto-Italic. Until we find evidence of some lost sister of proto-Turkic, we have no reason to speak of "developing a new language family".
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.8k12471
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
Apr 28 at 15:40
add a comment |
As for the title question, the answer would be "many languages, including proto-Chinese". Focusing on the question in the body, the language spoken by the historical ancestors of proto-Turks, there are two main options. One is that they spoke "pre-proto-Turkic", that is, an undocumented language whose properties are not presently recoverable. As for the name of that language, just as we don't know what ethnonym the proto-Indo-Europeans had for themselves (or the proto-Turks), we don't know what name the 10-generation before ancestors of the Turks or Indo-Europeans had for themselves. I should point out that there has been a theory that Mongolian, Tungusic and Turkic are themselves derives from an Altaic proto-language, but that hypothesis is now rejected by most linguists working in the area. Still, it could turn out that there actually is some unproven relationship between Turkic and some other language group.
An alternative would be that the individuals who constitute the majority of the speakers of the language reconstructable as "proto-Turkic" descended from people who switched languages from something else to proto-Turkic. For example, perhaps those people were Scythians, but for some political reason switched language to proto-Turkic. This has happened many times in world history, for example the ancestors of current Arabic speakers in a number of countries originally spoke Nilo-Saharan or Berber languages (among others), but for political reasons adopted Arabic. But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario, lacking in compelling historical support in the present case.
So the answer would be "pre-proto-Turkic", which means "whatever language preceded proto-Turkic". No new language family was started, instead, "proto-Turkic" refers to the limit of our ability to reconstruct languages. It may be sensible to talk of new families when dealing with daughter languages of a credible proto-language, such as Germanic or Italic in relation to Indo-European where we can say that the properties of PIE changed one way to give Proto-Germanic vs. another way to give proto-Italic. Until we find evidence of some lost sister of proto-Turkic, we have no reason to speak of "developing a new language family".
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.8k12471
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
Apr 28 at 15:40
add a comment |
As for the title question, the answer would be "many languages, including proto-Chinese". Focusing on the question in the body, the language spoken by the historical ancestors of proto-Turks, there are two main options. One is that they spoke "pre-proto-Turkic", that is, an undocumented language whose properties are not presently recoverable. As for the name of that language, just as we don't know what ethnonym the proto-Indo-Europeans had for themselves (or the proto-Turks), we don't know what name the 10-generation before ancestors of the Turks or Indo-Europeans had for themselves. I should point out that there has been a theory that Mongolian, Tungusic and Turkic are themselves derives from an Altaic proto-language, but that hypothesis is now rejected by most linguists working in the area. Still, it could turn out that there actually is some unproven relationship between Turkic and some other language group.
An alternative would be that the individuals who constitute the majority of the speakers of the language reconstructable as "proto-Turkic" descended from people who switched languages from something else to proto-Turkic. For example, perhaps those people were Scythians, but for some political reason switched language to proto-Turkic. This has happened many times in world history, for example the ancestors of current Arabic speakers in a number of countries originally spoke Nilo-Saharan or Berber languages (among others), but for political reasons adopted Arabic. But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario, lacking in compelling historical support in the present case.
So the answer would be "pre-proto-Turkic", which means "whatever language preceded proto-Turkic". No new language family was started, instead, "proto-Turkic" refers to the limit of our ability to reconstruct languages. It may be sensible to talk of new families when dealing with daughter languages of a credible proto-language, such as Germanic or Italic in relation to Indo-European where we can say that the properties of PIE changed one way to give Proto-Germanic vs. another way to give proto-Italic. Until we find evidence of some lost sister of proto-Turkic, we have no reason to speak of "developing a new language family".
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.8k12471
As for the title question, the answer would be "many languages, including proto-Chinese". Focusing on the question in the body, the language spoken by the historical ancestors of proto-Turks, there are two main options. One is that they spoke "pre-proto-Turkic", that is, an undocumented language whose properties are not presently recoverable. As for the name of that language, just as we don't know what ethnonym the proto-Indo-Europeans had for themselves (or the proto-Turks), we don't know what name the 10-generation before ancestors of the Turks or Indo-Europeans had for themselves. I should point out that there has been a theory that Mongolian, Tungusic and Turkic are themselves derives from an Altaic proto-language, but that hypothesis is now rejected by most linguists working in the area. Still, it could turn out that there actually is some unproven relationship between Turkic and some other language group.
An alternative would be that the individuals who constitute the majority of the speakers of the language reconstructable as "proto-Turkic" descended from people who switched languages from something else to proto-Turkic. For example, perhaps those people were Scythians, but for some political reason switched language to proto-Turkic. This has happened many times in world history, for example the ancestors of current Arabic speakers in a number of countries originally spoke Nilo-Saharan or Berber languages (among others), but for political reasons adopted Arabic. But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario, lacking in compelling historical support in the present case.
So the answer would be "pre-proto-Turkic", which means "whatever language preceded proto-Turkic". No new language family was started, instead, "proto-Turkic" refers to the limit of our ability to reconstruct languages. It may be sensible to talk of new families when dealing with daughter languages of a credible proto-language, such as Germanic or Italic in relation to Indo-European where we can say that the properties of PIE changed one way to give Proto-Germanic vs. another way to give proto-Italic. Until we find evidence of some lost sister of proto-Turkic, we have no reason to speak of "developing a new language family".
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.8k12471
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.8k12471
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.8k12471
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.8k12471
36.8k12471
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
Apr 28 at 15:40
add a comment |
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
Apr 28 at 15:40
3
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
Apr 28 at 15:40
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
Apr 28 at 15:40
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Linguistics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31277%2fwhat-language-was-spoken-in-east-asia-before-proto-turkic%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
2
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08