perhaps it would be better if you find the book and read it yourself...i could be reading it all wrong but it seems to me to be saying that all language originated with the PIE and spread out from there.
You are most definitely reading it wrong. As everyone has been trying to tell you and which you have steadfastly refused to understand.
Your book is talking about languages in the
Indo-European language family (or as the Germans call it, Indo-Germanisch). It can indeed be said all the languages within the
Indo-European language family originated with Proto-Indo-European (PIE). At the same time, it
cannot be said --
as you persist in falsely claiming -- that
all languages originated with PIE, because
the vast majority of human languages that have existed are not a part of the Indo-European language family.
What part of "a non-Indo-European language did
not originate from PIE" do you not understand?
Some examples of
non-Indo-European languages are Hebrew, Arabic, Basque, Finnish, Hungarian, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Polynesian,
Aborigine, American Indian languages, Bantu and other African languages. None of those languages are in the Indo-European language family
and none of those languages originated from PIE. Yet you claim that all those languages -- indeed,
all languages -- originated with PIE. Why? How?
For your edification (if that is possible), here's a short list of language families from Wikipedia {
List of language families - Wikipedia}:
quote:
By number of native speakers
This is a list of the top ten families with wide recognition as phylogenetic units, in terms of numbers of native speakers, listed with their core geographic areas.
1. Indo-European languages (Europe, Southwest to South Asia, America, Oceania)
2. Sino-Tibetan languages (East Asia)
3. Niger-Congo languages (Sub-Saharan Africa)
4. Afro-Asiatic languages (North Africa to Horn of Africa, Southwest Asia)
5. Austronesian languages (Oceania, Madagascar, maritime Southeast Asia)
6. Dravidian languages (South Asia)
7. Altaic languages (Central Asia)
8. Austro-Asiatic languages (mainland Southeast Asia)
9. Tai-Kadai languages (Southeast Asia)
10. Japonic languages (Japan)
Phyla with wide geographical distributions historically but comparatively few contemporary speakers include Eskimo-Aleut, Na-Dené, Algic, Quechuan and Nilo-Saharan.
By variety
According to the numbers in Ethnologue, the largest language families in terms of number of languages are the following. Some families are controversial, and in many the language count varies between researchers.
1. Niger-Congo (1,514 languages)
2. Austronesian (1,268 languages)
3. Trans-New Guinea (564 languages) (number disputed; Malcolm Ross excludes about a hundred of these)
4. Indo-European (449 languages)
5. Sino-Tibetan (403 languages)
6. Afro-Asiatic (375 languages)
7. Nilo-Saharan (204 languages)
8. Pama-Nyungan (178 languages)
9. Oto-Manguean (174 languages) (number varies; Lyle Campbell counts 27)
10. Austro-Asiatic (169 languages)
11. Sepik-Ramu (100 languages) (broken up by Malcolm Ross, with the Sepik family retaining 50)
12. Tai-Kadai (76 languages)
13. Tupi (76 languages)
14. Dravidian (73 languages)
15. Mayan (69 languages)
It has been repeatedly requested of you to support your blatantly false claim that "all language originated with the PIE". Your only response so far has been to blame your book. That response is totally irresponsible and blatantly false since your book does
not repeat your claim, but rather only speaks of the
Indo-European language family.
Yet again, please support your obviously and blatantly false claim.
Or else finally get a clue.
Edited by dwise1, : Relocated a misplaced sentence
™ Version 4.2
