These new results:
http://www.kotikielenseura.fi/viritt...tut/2006_2.pdf
http://www.sgr.fi/susa/92/hakkinen.pdf
In brief: Proto-Uralic started to expand about 2000 BC from the Volga-Kama area. So the Uralic languages
cannot predate the Indo-European languages here near the Baltic Sea. You see, the Indo-European dating has not changed: it is still connected to the Corded Ware Culture, reaching the Baltic Sea region about 3200 BC.
And here is something in English to tell you what is wrong with the continuity argument you believe in:
http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/jphakkin/Uralic.html
More in Finnish:
http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/jphakkin/Jatkuvuus1.pdf
Many linguists have already agreed with these new results. During the present decade you will see these views also in English and in popular books, and at 2020's they are in the school books. I have told this to you earlier in ForumBiodiversity, but you just refuse to understand it.
1. Some ancestors of Estonians have of course lived in Estonia "forever". But some of the ancestors are later newcomers.
2. You cannot claim that the Estonian language is inherited from the first inhabitants. Firstly, it is methodologically invalid (see the third link above), and secondly, it is against the linguistic results (see the first and second link above).
Bookmarks