We should throw away as almost useless the lexicostatistical method of Indo-European (IE) linguists who fail to investigate the 'IlakkaNam' but only the lexicon and which can all be borrowed from one common parent language for e.g. SumeroTamil.
As far as I can see languages like Latin, Greek and so forth DO NOT share the same IlakkaNam with Rigkrit and so forth- they are NOT the agglutinating kind of languages with case suffixes, verbal prefixes, infixes and so forth.
In view of this we have to study in greater depth Tolkaappiyam that outlines Process Grammar, and which discloses the various kinds of TRANSFORMATIONAL processes that can help us to describe scientifically how one language evolves from another e.g. Rigkrit and C.Tamil from Sumero-Tamil etc.
The lexicostatistical method of IE linguistics with overemphasis of phonological processes and blindness towards others, does not have the resources for explaining how over time one kind of language can evolve from another and so forth. In that way they are also incapable of describing the COGNATENESS of languages, how a number of languages can be considered of the SAME family. In terms of Process Grammar such as that of Tol and its extension, we can see two languages with an identity of their own to be cognate if one of them is a TRANSFORMATION of the other like Rigkrit in relation to Sumero-Tamil and so forth.
Dr K Loganathan Krishnan @ Ullaganar
"As far as I can see languages like Latin, Greek and so forth DO NOT share the same IlakkaNam with Rigkrit and so forth- they are NOT the agglutinating kind of languages with case suffixes, verbal prefixes, infixes and so forth."
ReplyDeleteAs far as I know, Sanskrit is not agglutinating. A certain case in plural, say dative plural, does not have two endings, a plural and a dative or a dative and a plural, but a single one, dative plural, as Greek (-ois or -oisi for II declinsion, -ais for I, -si for III), Latin (-is both I and II, -(i)bus III, IV, V and part of I), Germanic, (both Old Norse and Old English -um), Lithuanian -ams or -iams ...
They certainly do have verbal prefixes, both augment and reduplication and infixes, notably the nasal infix in present.
So, no, your debunking won't wash.