124018396 03 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code Z 215 GE 15 9789027264640 06 10.1075/z.215 13 2018036512 00 EA E133 10 01 JB code Z 02 215.00 01 02 Not in series Not in series 01 01 Language Dispersal Beyond Farming Language Dispersal Beyond Farming 1 B01 01 JB code 667284991 Martine Robbeets Robbeets, Martine Martine Robbeets Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 2 B01 01 JB code 978297137 Alexander Savelyev Savelyev, Alexander Alexander Savelyev Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 01 eng 11 338 03 03 xiii 03 00 324 03 24 JB code LIN.ANTHR Anthropological Linguistics 24 JB code LIN.EVO Evolution of language 24 JB code LIN.HL Historical linguistics 24 JB code LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 10 LAN009010 12 CFF 01 06 03 00 Why do some languages wither and die, while others prosper and spread? Around the turn of the millennium a number of archaeologists such as Colin Renfrew and Peter Bellwood made the controversial claim that many of the world’s major language families owe their dispersal to the adoption of agriculture by their early speakers. In this volume, their proposal is reassessed by linguists, investigating to what extent the economic dependence on plant cultivation really impacted language spread in various parts of the world. Special attention is paid to "tricky" language families such as Eskimo-Aleut, Quechua, Aymara, Bantu, Indo-European, Transeurasian, Turkic, Japano-Koreanic, Hmong-Mien and Trans-New Guinea, that cannot unequivocally be regarded as instances of Farming/Language Dispersal, even if subsistence played a role in their expansion. 01 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/z.215.png 01 01 D502 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027212559.jpg 01 01 D504 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027212559.tif 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/z.215.hb.png 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/z.215.png 02 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/z.215.hb.png 03 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/z.215.hb.png 01 01 JB code z.215.lot 06 10.1075/z.215.lot vii viii 2 Miscellaneous 1 01 04 List of tables List of tables 01 01 JB code z.215.lof 06 10.1075/z.215.lof ix x 2 Miscellaneous 2 01 04 List of figures List of figures 01 01 JB code z.215.loc 06 10.1075/z.215.loc xi xii 2 Miscellaneous 3 01 04 List of contributors List of contributors 01 01 JB code z.215.ack 06 10.1075/z.215.ack xiii xiii 1 Miscellaneous 4 01 04 Acknowledgements Acknowledgements 01 01 JB code z.215.01rob 06 10.1075/z.215.01rob 1 23 23 Chapter 5 01 04 Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal 01 04 Food for thought Food for thought 1 A01 01 JB code 920314391 Martine Robbeets Robbeets, Martine Martine Robbeets Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History 01 01 JB code z.215.02eml 06 10.1075/z.215.02eml 25 45 21 Chapter 6 01 04 Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms 01 04 Reconstruction and contact patterns Reconstruction and contact patterns 1 A01 01 JB code 446314392 Nicholas Q. Emlen Emlen, Nicholas Q. Nicholas Q. Emlen Leiden University Centre for Linguistics 2 A01 01 JB code 663314393 Willem F. H. Adelaar Adelaar, Willem F. H. Willem F. H. Adelaar Leiden University Centre for Linguistics 01 01 JB code z.215.03ber 06 10.1075/z.215.03ber 47 73 27 Chapter 7 01 04 Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut) Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut) 1 A01 01 JB code 237314394 Anna Berge Berge, Anna Anna Berge Alaska Native Language Center 01 01 JB code z.215.04fra 06 10.1075/z.215.04fra 75 92 18 Chapter 8 01 04 Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture 1 A01 01 JB code 159314395 Alexander Francis-Ratte Francis-Ratte, Alexander Alexander Francis-Ratte Furman University 01 01 JB code z.215.05rob 06 10.1075/z.215.05rob 93 121 29 Chapter 9 01 04 Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers 1 A01 01 JB code 129314396 Martine Robbeets Robbeets, Martine Martine Robbeets Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 01 01 JB code z.215.06sav 06 10.1075/z.215.06sav 123 154 32 Chapter 10 01 04 Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic 1 A01 01 JB code 169314397 Alexander Savelyev Savelyev, Alexander Alexander Savelyev Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 01 01 JB code z.215.07sch 06 10.1075/z.215.07sch 155 181 27 Chapter 11 01 04 Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family 01 04 A consideration A consideration 1 A01 01 JB code 71314398 Antoinette Schapper Schapper, Antoinette Antoinette Schapper KITLV/University of Cologne 01 01 JB code z.215.08van 06 10.1075/z.215.08van 183 214 32 Chapter 12 01 04 Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice 1 A01 01 JB code 120314399 George L. Driem Driem, George L. George L. Driem Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Bern, Switzerland 01 01 JB code z.215.09sta 06 10.1075/z.215.09sta 215 233 19 Chapter 13 01 04 Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon 01 04 Problems and perspectives Problems and perspectives 1 A01 01 JB code 42314400 George Starostin Starostin, George George Starostin Russian State University for the Humanities/Russian Presidential Academy, Moscow 01 01 JB code z.215.10bos 06 10.1075/z.215.10bos 235 258 24 Chapter 14 01 04 Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers? Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers? 01 04 A first assessment of the linguistic evidence A first assessment of the linguistic evidence 1 A01 01 JB code 144314401 Koen Bostoen Bostoen, Koen Koen Bostoen UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent) 2 A01 01 JB code 474314402 Joseph Koni Muluwa Koni Muluwa, Joseph Joseph Koni Muluwa UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent) 01 01 JB code z.215.11jos 06 10.1075/z.215.11jos 259 274 16 Chapter 15 01 04 Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal 1 A01 01 JB code 556314403 Brian D. Joseph Joseph, Brian D. Brian D. Joseph The Ohio State University 01 01 JB code z.215.12kum 06 10.1075/z.215.12kum 275 290 16 Chapter 16 01 04 Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian 1 A01 01 JB code 620314404 Martin Joachim Kümmel Kümmel, Martin Joachim Martin Joachim Kümmel Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena 01 01 JB code z.215.13gar 06 10.1075/z.215.13gar 291 311 21 Chapter 17 01 04 Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans 1 A01 01 JB code 557314405 Romain Garnier Garnier, Romain Romain Garnier Université de Limoges and Institut Universitaire de France 2 A01 01 JB code 798314406 Laurent Sagart Sagart, Laurent Laurent Sagart Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique 3 A01 01 JB code 110314407 Benoît Sagot Sagot, Benoît Benoît Sagot Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique 01 01 JB code z.215.ai 06 10.1075/z.215.ai 313 319 7 Miscellaneous 18 01 04 Language index Language index 01 01 JB code z.215.si 06 10.1075/z.215.si 321 324 4 Miscellaneous 19 01 04 Subject index Subject index 01 JB code JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 https://benjamins.com Amsterdam NL 00 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 04 01 00 20171221 C 2017 John Benjamins D 2017 John Benjamins 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027212559 WORLD 03 01 JB 17 Google 03 https://play.google.com/store/books 21 01 345017814 03 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code Z 215 Eb 15 9789027264640 06 10.1075/z.215 13 2018036512 00 EA E107 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 01 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 11 01 JB code jbe-openaccess 01 02 Open Access Books (ca. 70 titles) 11 01 JB code jbe-all 01 02 Full EBA collection (ca. 4,200 titles) 11 01 JB code jbe-2017 01 02 2017 collection (152 titles) 05 02 2017 collection 01 01 Language Dispersal Beyond Farming Language Dispersal Beyond Farming 1 B01 01 JB code 667284991 Martine Robbeets Robbeets, Martine Martine Robbeets Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/667284991 2 B01 01 JB code 978297137 Alexander Savelyev Savelyev, Alexander Alexander Savelyev Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/978297137 01 eng 11 338 03 03 xiii 03 00 324 03 01 23 417/.7 03 2016 P40.5.L37 04 Language spread--Congresses. 04 Languages in contact--Congresses. 04 Agriculture, Prehistoric--Congresses. 04 Pastoral systems, Prehistoric--Congresses. 04 Anthropologic linguistics--Congresses. 10 LAN009010 12 CFF 24 JB code LIN.ANTHR Anthropological Linguistics 24 JB code LIN.EVO Evolution of language 24 JB code LIN.HL Historical linguistics 24 JB code LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 01 06 03 00 Why do some languages wither and die, while others prosper and spread? Around the turn of the millennium a number of archaeologists such as Colin Renfrew and Peter Bellwood made the controversial claim that many of the world’s major language families owe their dispersal to the adoption of agriculture by their early speakers. In this volume, their proposal is reassessed by linguists, investigating to what extent the economic dependence on plant cultivation really impacted language spread in various parts of the world. Special attention is paid to "tricky" language families such as Eskimo-Aleut, Quechua, Aymara, Bantu, Indo-European, Transeurasian, Turkic, Japano-Koreanic, Hmong-Mien and Trans-New Guinea, that cannot unequivocally be regarded as instances of Farming/Language Dispersal, even if subsistence played a role in their expansion. 01 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/z.215.png 01 01 D502 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027212559.jpg 01 01 D504 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027212559.tif 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/z.215.hb.png 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/z.215.png 02 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/z.215.hb.png 03 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/z.215.hb.png 01 01 JB code z.215.lot 06 10.1075/z.215.lot vii viii 2 Miscellaneous 1 01 04 List of tables List of tables 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.lof 06 10.1075/z.215.lof ix x 2 Miscellaneous 2 01 04 List of figures List of figures 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.loc 06 10.1075/z.215.loc xi xii 2 Miscellaneous 3 01 04 List of contributors List of contributors 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.ack 06 10.1075/z.215.ack xiii xiii 1 Miscellaneous 4 01 04 Acknowledgements Acknowledgements 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.01rob 06 10.1075/z.215.01rob 1 23 23 Chapter 5 01 04 Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal 01 04 Food for thought Food for thought 1 A01 01 JB code 920314391 Martine Robbeets Robbeets, Martine Martine Robbeets Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/920314391 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.02eml 06 10.1075/z.215.02eml 25 45 21 Chapter 6 01 04 Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms 01 04 Reconstruction and contact patterns Reconstruction and contact patterns 1 A01 01 JB code 446314392 Nicholas Q. Emlen Emlen, Nicholas Q. Nicholas Q. Emlen Leiden University Centre for Linguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/446314392 2 A01 01 JB code 663314393 Willem F. H. Adelaar Adelaar, Willem F. H. Willem F. H. Adelaar Leiden University Centre for Linguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/663314393 01 eng 30 00 This chapter presents reconstructed Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara lexical items related to cultivation and herding, and draws conclusions about language and subsistence in the ancient Andes. The patterns of lexical borrowing between the two lineages offer a novel empirical perspective on how early Quechuan and Aymaran speakers lived. When the many layers of borrowing are stripped away, it is clear that both were engaged in agropastoral economies before the languages first came into contact. Furthermore, the presence of terms from a wide range of ecological zones, from the high grasslands to (in the case of Quechua) the tropical lowlands, suggests that both languages cross-cut elevations in a manner consistent with the typically Andean system of ecological complementarity. 01 01 JB code z.215.03ber 06 10.1075/z.215.03ber 47 73 27 Chapter 7 01 04 Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut) Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut) 1 A01 01 JB code 237314394 Anna Berge Berge, Anna Anna Berge Alaska Native Language Center 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/237314394 01 eng 30 00 The Eskimo-Aleut are arctic and subarctic hunter-gatherers known for their geographic spread and successful adaptation to a harsh climate; they are one of the canonical examples of a people that spread without agriculture. One of the most prehistoric recent spreads in this language family occurred about 1000 years ago, with effects felt throughout coastal Alaska. One area of language contact and possible spread was in Southeast Alaska, between the Pacific Coast Yupik language Alutiiq and the Aleutian language Unangam Tunuu. In this paper, I look at the distribution of cognates and borrowings of subsistence terminology in Unangam Tunuu, and I show that Alutiiq must have spread into a previously Unangax̂ area as a result of warfare rather than subsistence activities. 01 01 JB code z.215.04fra 06 10.1075/z.215.04fra 75 92 18 Chapter 8 01 04 Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture 1 A01 01 JB code 159314395 Alexander Francis-Ratte Francis-Ratte, Alexander Alexander Francis-Ratte Furman University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/159314395 01 eng 30 00 Despite the existence of strong cognates in other realms of basic vocabulary, it remains unclear why Korean and Japanese share so few words for grain and agriculture. This paper proposes that pre-rice vocabulary has undergone a process of lexical recycling in Korean to refer to later rice-related practices. The observation that Korean words for ‘rice’ contain initial p suggests common derivations from pre-MK *po ‘rice(?)’ that is relatable to Old Japanese po ‘a grain’. This paper uncovers important Japano-Koreanic cognates, including ‘buckwheat,’ ‘millet,’ and ‘rice plant’. This analysis also shows how linguists may retrieve early agricultural terminology that has been replaced by more advanced practices. 01 01 JB code z.215.05rob 06 10.1075/z.215.05rob 93 121 29 Chapter 9 01 04 Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers 1 A01 01 JB code 129314396 Martine Robbeets Robbeets, Martine Martine Robbeets Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/129314396 01 eng 30 00 The Farming Language Dispersal Hypothesis makes the radical and controversial claim that many of the world’s major language families owe their present-day distribution to the adoption of agriculture by their early speakers. Especially for regions such as Northern Asia, where farming is only marginally viable, this claim has been seriously called into question. This paper investigates to what extent agriculture impacted the dispersal of the Transeurasian language family, i.e. the genealogical grouping consisting of the Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Koreanic and Japonic languages. For this purpose, I establish the internal family structure of Transeurasian, reconstruct cultural vocabulary and situate the Transeurasian languages in time and space. Assessing the cultural reconstructions and mapping the tree topology, time-depth and homeland on the demographic transitions visible in the archaeological and genetic record, I find indications that proto-Transeurasian was spoken by people gradually adopting farming and that its dispersal was indeed driven by agriculture. 01 01 JB code z.215.06sav 06 10.1075/z.215.06sav 123 154 32 Chapter 10 01 04 Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic 1 A01 01 JB code 169314397 Alexander Savelyev Savelyev, Alexander Alexander Savelyev Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/169314397 01 eng 30 00 Historical sources from different times describe Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic traditional economies as based on pastoralism, with agriculture playing only a minor role among their subsistence strategies. Cultural reconstruction as used by historical linguists may provide additional inferences about the relative importance of farming and pastoralism in these lineages. This paper focuses on the origin of agricultural and pastoralist terms in Proto-Turkic and their parallels in the other branches of Altaic, i.e., Mongolic and Tungusic. I show that the majority of the Turkic pastoralist lexicon has a secondary nature, being formed due to contact, derivation or lexical recycling. At the same time, farming-related terms in Turkic are mostly unborrowed and underived and a few of them have reliable Altaic connections. The very limited number of agricultural terms reconstructible to Proto-Altaic as compared to the preceding Proto-Transeurasian period can be attributed to a loss of farming-related lexicon over time after the break-up of Altaic. 01 01 JB code z.215.07sch 06 10.1075/z.215.07sch 155 181 27 Chapter 11 01 04 Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family 01 04 A consideration A consideration 1 A01 01 JB code 71314398 Antoinette Schapper Schapper, Antoinette Antoinette Schapper KITLV/University of Cologne 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/71314398 01 eng 30 00 The island of New Guinea, located to the north of Australia, is one of the world’s major centres of early agriculture and plant domestication. At the same time, a large number of the languages of New Guinea and adjacent areas share a common origin and are believed to belong to a single language family, the Trans-New Guinea family. This paper presents a first attempt to apply the farming-language dispersal hypothesis to the New Guinea case. While the archaeological literature on early agriculture in New Guinea has focused mainly on taro, there is reason to doubt that taro was associated with the Trans-New Guinea expansion. In this paper, I instead consider the role of banana and sugarcane. The occurrence in many Trans-New Guinea languages of related terms for these two crops suggests that these were part of the “farming package” which fuelled the expansion of the family and its speakers. 01 01 JB code z.215.08van 06 10.1075/z.215.08van 183 214 32 Chapter 12 01 04 Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice 1 A01 01 JB code 120314399 George L. Driem Driem, George L. George L. Driem Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Bern, Switzerland 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/120314399 01 eng 30 00 Rice genetics has now provided molecular evidence for three distinct domestications of Asian rice, giving rise to ahu, indica and japonica rice and subsequently involving the multidirectional introgression of favoured alleles between these three families of Oryza sativa cultivars. The phylogeography of Asian wild and cultivated rice species also permits inferences with regard to the likely geographical range within which these three domestication processes involving Asian cultivated rice unfolded. Evidence from linguistic palaeontology permits the identification of two language families whose linguistic ancestors pose the likeliest candidates for the earliest rice domesticators, Austroasiatic and Hmong-Mien. The linguistic arguments and population genetic evidence on Asian rice are assessed. Recent advances in palaeobotany as well as a number of currently prevalent misunderstandings in rice archaeology are discussed. Another set of evidence from linguistic palaeontology involving reconstructible etyma denoting megafauna in light of the early Holocene distribution of these megafaunal species provides a geographical indication for the location of the early Austroasiatic homeland. Furthermore, the molecular genetics of human populations are discussed in order to shed light on the prehistory and geography of the Austroasiatic, Hmong-Mien and other language families. Finally, a synthesis of the disparate sets of evidence is presented. 01 01 JB code z.215.09sta 06 10.1075/z.215.09sta 215 233 19 Chapter 13 01 04 Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon 01 04 Problems and perspectives Problems and perspectives 1 A01 01 JB code 42314400 George Starostin Starostin, George George Starostin Russian State University for the Humanities/Russian Presidential Academy, Moscow 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/42314400 01 eng 30 00 It is more or less self-evident that the origins of agriculture cannot be directly associated with the ancestral speakers of any of the commonly accepted, non-controversial language families such as Indo-European, Semitic, Dravidian, etc., since these origins go much deeper back in time than any of these ancestral languages. Consequently, in this paper I present a brief overview of some of the most promising, if controversial, hypotheses on deep-level language relationship between various linguistic stocks of Western and Central Eurasia in terms of whether or not there is a chance of reconstructing at least a small amount of agricultural terminology for such hypothetical entities as Proto-Nostratic, Proto-Sino-Caucasian, and Proto-Afroasiatic. The overview leads to the conclusion that some of the most archaic agricultural terminology in the Near East may be associated with the North Caucasian linguistic family and, possibly, also with Basque as its nearest genetic relative; at the same time, evidence of ancient agricultural lexicon in the Afroasiatic stock remains at best circumstantial, whereas evidence from various lineages of “Nostratic” is practically non-existent. 01 01 JB code z.215.10bos 06 10.1075/z.215.10bos 235 258 24 Chapter 14 01 04 Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers? Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers? 01 04 A first assessment of the linguistic evidence A first assessment of the linguistic evidence 1 A01 01 JB code 144314401 Koen Bostoen Bostoen, Koen Koen Bostoen UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent) 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/144314401 2 A01 01 JB code 474314402 Joseph Koni Muluwa Koni Muluwa, Joseph Joseph Koni Muluwa UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent) 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/474314402 01 eng 30 00 Popular belief has it that the Bantu Expansion was a farming/language dispersal. However, there is neither conclusive archaeological nor linguistic evidence to substantiate this hypothesis, especially not for the initial spread in West-Central Africa. In this chapter we consider lexical reconstructions for both domesticated and wild plants in Proto-West-Coastal Bantu associated with the first Bantu speech communities south of the rainforest about 2500 years ago. The possibility to reconstruct terms for five different crops, i.e. pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum), okra (Hibiscus/Abelmoschus esculentus), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata), Bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranea) and plantain (Musa spp.), indicates that by that time Bantu speakers did know how to cultivate plants. At the same time, they still strongly depended on the plant resources that could be collected in their natural environment, as is evidenced by a preliminary assessment of reconstructible names for wild plants. Agriculture in Central Africa was indeed “a slow revolution”, as the late Jan Vansina once proposed, and certainly not the principal motor behind the early Bantu Expansion. 01 01 JB code z.215.11jos 06 10.1075/z.215.11jos 259 274 16 Chapter 15 01 04 Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal 1 A01 01 JB code 556314403 Brian D. Joseph Joseph, Brian D. Brian D. Joseph The Ohio State University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/556314403 01 eng 30 00 Analysis of agricultural vocabulary remains one of the most compelling methodologies bearing on Renfrew’s Farming/Language Dispersal Hypothesis, by which the reconstructed lexicon for a proto-language of a well-dispersed language family is predicted to contain several agricultural items. Mostly, though, this methodology has involved noting the presence or absence of particular lexical items for a given proto-language and drawing inferences from that, or working out root derivations and drawing appropriate inferences. I propose here two new types of lexically based argument, by way of expanding the methodology of lexical examination and analysis, looking first at derivational processes involved in the creation of relevant words and the meaning that such processes add to the derivative, and then at religious rituals and mythology to examine the embedding of agricultural vocabulary into the religious practices and mythological tales associated with early Indo-European culture. Ultimately, then, I argue that it is not enough to just look at the meanings of particular words and to try to develop a sense of what they originally meant, nor is it enough to determine the source of the words (derivation, etymology). Rather, one also has to look at how the words were used, what is reconstructible about the use and form of the word, and what the cultural context was for the words. Only then can insights derived from lexical examination be used in developing a sense of prehistory. 01 01 JB code z.215.12kum 06 10.1075/z.215.12kum 275 290 16 Chapter 16 01 04 Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian 1 A01 01 JB code 620314404 Martin Joachim Kümmel Kümmel, Martin Joachim Martin Joachim Kümmel Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/620314404 01 eng 30 00 The article investigates the agricultural lexicon of Indo-Iranian, especially its earlier records, and what it may tell us about the spread of farming. After some general remarks on “Neolithic” vocabulary, a short overview of the animal husbandry terminology shows that this field of vocabulary was evidently well-established in Proto-Indo-Iranian, with many cognate terms. Words for cattle, horses, sheep and goats are well developed and mostly inherited, while evidence for pigs is more limited, ad the words for donkey and camel look like common loans. A more extensive discussion of plant terminology reveals that while some generic terms for grain are inherited, more specific words for different kinds of cereals show few inherited terms and/or irregular variation, and the same is even clearer for pulses and some other vegetables. The terminology for agricultural terminology is largely different from that of most European branches of Indo-European. The conclusion is that the cultural background behind these linguistic data points to spreading of a mainly pastoralist culture in the case of Indo-Iranian. 01 01 JB code z.215.13gar 06 10.1075/z.215.13gar 291 311 21 Chapter 17 01 04 Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans 1 A01 01 JB code 557314405 Romain Garnier Garnier, Romain Romain Garnier Université de Limoges and Institut Universitaire de France 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/557314405 2 A01 01 JB code 798314406 Laurent Sagart Sagart, Laurent Laurent Sagart Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/798314406 3 A01 01 JB code 110314407 Benoît Sagot Sagot, Benoît Benoît Sagot Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/110314407 01 eng 30 00 Recent evidence from archaeology and ancient DNA converge to indicate that the Yamnaya culture, often regarded as the bearer of the Proto-Indo-European language, underwent a strong population expansion in the late 4th and early 3rd millennia BCE. It suggests that the underlying reason for that expansion might be the then unique capacity to digest animal milk in adulthood. We examine the early Indo-European milk-related vocabulary to confirm the special role of animal milk in Indo-European expansions. We show that Proto-Indo-European did not have a specialized root for ‘to milk’ and argue that the IE root *h2melg̑- ‘to milk’ is secondary and post-Anatolian. We take this innovation as an indication of the novelty of animal milking in early Indo-European society. Together with a detailed study of language-specific innovations in this semantic field, we conclude that the ability to digest milk played an important role in boosting Proto-Indo-European demography. 01 01 JB code z.215.ai 06 10.1075/z.215.ai 313 313 1 Miscellaneous 18 01 04 Language index Language index 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.si 06 10.1075/z.215.si 321 321 1 Miscellaneous 19 01 04 Subject index Subject index 01 eng 01 JB code JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/z.215 Amsterdam NL 00 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 04 01 00 20171221 C 2017 John Benjamins D 2017 John Benjamins 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027212559 WORLD 09 01 JB 3 John Benjamins e-Platform 03 https://jbe-platform.com 29 https://jbe-platform.com/content/books/9789027264640 21 01 973017813 03 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code Z 215 Hb 15 9789027212559 06 10.1075/z.215 13 2017041487 00 BB 08 740 gr 01 01 Language Dispersal Beyond Farming Language Dispersal Beyond Farming 1 B01 01 JB code 667284991 Martine Robbeets Robbeets, Martine Martine Robbeets Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/667284991 2 B01 01 JB code 978297137 Alexander Savelyev Savelyev, Alexander Alexander Savelyev Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/978297137 01 eng 11 338 03 03 xiii 03 00 324 03 01 23 417/.7 03 2016 P40.5.L37 04 Language spread--Congresses. 04 Languages in contact--Congresses. 04 Agriculture, Prehistoric--Congresses. 04 Pastoral systems, Prehistoric--Congresses. 04 Anthropologic linguistics--Congresses. 10 LAN009010 12 CFF 24 JB code LIN.ANTHR Anthropological Linguistics 24 JB code LIN.EVO Evolution of language 24 JB code LIN.HL Historical linguistics 24 JB code LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 01 06 03 00 Why do some languages wither and die, while others prosper and spread? Around the turn of the millennium a number of archaeologists such as Colin Renfrew and Peter Bellwood made the controversial claim that many of the world’s major language families owe their dispersal to the adoption of agriculture by their early speakers. In this volume, their proposal is reassessed by linguists, investigating to what extent the economic dependence on plant cultivation really impacted language spread in various parts of the world. Special attention is paid to "tricky" language families such as Eskimo-Aleut, Quechua, Aymara, Bantu, Indo-European, Transeurasian, Turkic, Japano-Koreanic, Hmong-Mien and Trans-New Guinea, that cannot unequivocally be regarded as instances of Farming/Language Dispersal, even if subsistence played a role in their expansion. 01 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/z.215.png 01 01 D502 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027212559.jpg 01 01 D504 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027212559.tif 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/z.215.hb.png 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/z.215.png 02 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/z.215.hb.png 03 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/z.215.hb.png 01 01 JB code z.215.lot 06 10.1075/z.215.lot vii viii 2 Miscellaneous 1 01 04 List of tables List of tables 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.lof 06 10.1075/z.215.lof ix x 2 Miscellaneous 2 01 04 List of figures List of figures 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.loc 06 10.1075/z.215.loc xi xii 2 Miscellaneous 3 01 04 List of contributors List of contributors 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.ack 06 10.1075/z.215.ack xiii xiii 1 Miscellaneous 4 01 04 Acknowledgements Acknowledgements 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.01rob 06 10.1075/z.215.01rob 1 23 23 Chapter 5 01 04 Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal 01 04 Food for thought Food for thought 1 A01 01 JB code 920314391 Martine Robbeets Robbeets, Martine Martine Robbeets Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/920314391 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.02eml 06 10.1075/z.215.02eml 25 45 21 Chapter 6 01 04 Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms 01 04 Reconstruction and contact patterns Reconstruction and contact patterns 1 A01 01 JB code 446314392 Nicholas Q. Emlen Emlen, Nicholas Q. Nicholas Q. Emlen Leiden University Centre for Linguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/446314392 2 A01 01 JB code 663314393 Willem F. H. Adelaar Adelaar, Willem F. H. Willem F. H. Adelaar Leiden University Centre for Linguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/663314393 01 eng 30 00 This chapter presents reconstructed Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara lexical items related to cultivation and herding, and draws conclusions about language and subsistence in the ancient Andes. The patterns of lexical borrowing between the two lineages offer a novel empirical perspective on how early Quechuan and Aymaran speakers lived. When the many layers of borrowing are stripped away, it is clear that both were engaged in agropastoral economies before the languages first came into contact. Furthermore, the presence of terms from a wide range of ecological zones, from the high grasslands to (in the case of Quechua) the tropical lowlands, suggests that both languages cross-cut elevations in a manner consistent with the typically Andean system of ecological complementarity. 01 01 JB code z.215.03ber 06 10.1075/z.215.03ber 47 73 27 Chapter 7 01 04 Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut) Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut) 1 A01 01 JB code 237314394 Anna Berge Berge, Anna Anna Berge Alaska Native Language Center 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/237314394 01 eng 30 00 The Eskimo-Aleut are arctic and subarctic hunter-gatherers known for their geographic spread and successful adaptation to a harsh climate; they are one of the canonical examples of a people that spread without agriculture. One of the most prehistoric recent spreads in this language family occurred about 1000 years ago, with effects felt throughout coastal Alaska. One area of language contact and possible spread was in Southeast Alaska, between the Pacific Coast Yupik language Alutiiq and the Aleutian language Unangam Tunuu. In this paper, I look at the distribution of cognates and borrowings of subsistence terminology in Unangam Tunuu, and I show that Alutiiq must have spread into a previously Unangax̂ area as a result of warfare rather than subsistence activities. 01 01 JB code z.215.04fra 06 10.1075/z.215.04fra 75 92 18 Chapter 8 01 04 Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture 1 A01 01 JB code 159314395 Alexander Francis-Ratte Francis-Ratte, Alexander Alexander Francis-Ratte Furman University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/159314395 01 eng 30 00 Despite the existence of strong cognates in other realms of basic vocabulary, it remains unclear why Korean and Japanese share so few words for grain and agriculture. This paper proposes that pre-rice vocabulary has undergone a process of lexical recycling in Korean to refer to later rice-related practices. The observation that Korean words for ‘rice’ contain initial p suggests common derivations from pre-MK *po ‘rice(?)’ that is relatable to Old Japanese po ‘a grain’. This paper uncovers important Japano-Koreanic cognates, including ‘buckwheat,’ ‘millet,’ and ‘rice plant’. This analysis also shows how linguists may retrieve early agricultural terminology that has been replaced by more advanced practices. 01 01 JB code z.215.05rob 06 10.1075/z.215.05rob 93 121 29 Chapter 9 01 04 Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers 1 A01 01 JB code 129314396 Martine Robbeets Robbeets, Martine Martine Robbeets Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/129314396 01 eng 30 00 The Farming Language Dispersal Hypothesis makes the radical and controversial claim that many of the world’s major language families owe their present-day distribution to the adoption of agriculture by their early speakers. Especially for regions such as Northern Asia, where farming is only marginally viable, this claim has been seriously called into question. This paper investigates to what extent agriculture impacted the dispersal of the Transeurasian language family, i.e. the genealogical grouping consisting of the Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Koreanic and Japonic languages. For this purpose, I establish the internal family structure of Transeurasian, reconstruct cultural vocabulary and situate the Transeurasian languages in time and space. Assessing the cultural reconstructions and mapping the tree topology, time-depth and homeland on the demographic transitions visible in the archaeological and genetic record, I find indications that proto-Transeurasian was spoken by people gradually adopting farming and that its dispersal was indeed driven by agriculture. 01 01 JB code z.215.06sav 06 10.1075/z.215.06sav 123 154 32 Chapter 10 01 04 Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic 1 A01 01 JB code 169314397 Alexander Savelyev Savelyev, Alexander Alexander Savelyev Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/169314397 01 eng 30 00 Historical sources from different times describe Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic traditional economies as based on pastoralism, with agriculture playing only a minor role among their subsistence strategies. Cultural reconstruction as used by historical linguists may provide additional inferences about the relative importance of farming and pastoralism in these lineages. This paper focuses on the origin of agricultural and pastoralist terms in Proto-Turkic and their parallels in the other branches of Altaic, i.e., Mongolic and Tungusic. I show that the majority of the Turkic pastoralist lexicon has a secondary nature, being formed due to contact, derivation or lexical recycling. At the same time, farming-related terms in Turkic are mostly unborrowed and underived and a few of them have reliable Altaic connections. The very limited number of agricultural terms reconstructible to Proto-Altaic as compared to the preceding Proto-Transeurasian period can be attributed to a loss of farming-related lexicon over time after the break-up of Altaic. 01 01 JB code z.215.07sch 06 10.1075/z.215.07sch 155 181 27 Chapter 11 01 04 Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family 01 04 A consideration A consideration 1 A01 01 JB code 71314398 Antoinette Schapper Schapper, Antoinette Antoinette Schapper KITLV/University of Cologne 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/71314398 01 eng 30 00 The island of New Guinea, located to the north of Australia, is one of the world’s major centres of early agriculture and plant domestication. At the same time, a large number of the languages of New Guinea and adjacent areas share a common origin and are believed to belong to a single language family, the Trans-New Guinea family. This paper presents a first attempt to apply the farming-language dispersal hypothesis to the New Guinea case. While the archaeological literature on early agriculture in New Guinea has focused mainly on taro, there is reason to doubt that taro was associated with the Trans-New Guinea expansion. In this paper, I instead consider the role of banana and sugarcane. The occurrence in many Trans-New Guinea languages of related terms for these two crops suggests that these were part of the “farming package” which fuelled the expansion of the family and its speakers. 01 01 JB code z.215.08van 06 10.1075/z.215.08van 183 214 32 Chapter 12 01 04 Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice 1 A01 01 JB code 120314399 George L. Driem Driem, George L. George L. Driem Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Bern, Switzerland 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/120314399 01 eng 30 00 Rice genetics has now provided molecular evidence for three distinct domestications of Asian rice, giving rise to ahu, indica and japonica rice and subsequently involving the multidirectional introgression of favoured alleles between these three families of Oryza sativa cultivars. The phylogeography of Asian wild and cultivated rice species also permits inferences with regard to the likely geographical range within which these three domestication processes involving Asian cultivated rice unfolded. Evidence from linguistic palaeontology permits the identification of two language families whose linguistic ancestors pose the likeliest candidates for the earliest rice domesticators, Austroasiatic and Hmong-Mien. The linguistic arguments and population genetic evidence on Asian rice are assessed. Recent advances in palaeobotany as well as a number of currently prevalent misunderstandings in rice archaeology are discussed. Another set of evidence from linguistic palaeontology involving reconstructible etyma denoting megafauna in light of the early Holocene distribution of these megafaunal species provides a geographical indication for the location of the early Austroasiatic homeland. Furthermore, the molecular genetics of human populations are discussed in order to shed light on the prehistory and geography of the Austroasiatic, Hmong-Mien and other language families. Finally, a synthesis of the disparate sets of evidence is presented. 01 01 JB code z.215.09sta 06 10.1075/z.215.09sta 215 233 19 Chapter 13 01 04 Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon 01 04 Problems and perspectives Problems and perspectives 1 A01 01 JB code 42314400 George Starostin Starostin, George George Starostin Russian State University for the Humanities/Russian Presidential Academy, Moscow 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/42314400 01 eng 30 00 It is more or less self-evident that the origins of agriculture cannot be directly associated with the ancestral speakers of any of the commonly accepted, non-controversial language families such as Indo-European, Semitic, Dravidian, etc., since these origins go much deeper back in time than any of these ancestral languages. Consequently, in this paper I present a brief overview of some of the most promising, if controversial, hypotheses on deep-level language relationship between various linguistic stocks of Western and Central Eurasia in terms of whether or not there is a chance of reconstructing at least a small amount of agricultural terminology for such hypothetical entities as Proto-Nostratic, Proto-Sino-Caucasian, and Proto-Afroasiatic. The overview leads to the conclusion that some of the most archaic agricultural terminology in the Near East may be associated with the North Caucasian linguistic family and, possibly, also with Basque as its nearest genetic relative; at the same time, evidence of ancient agricultural lexicon in the Afroasiatic stock remains at best circumstantial, whereas evidence from various lineages of “Nostratic” is practically non-existent. 01 01 JB code z.215.10bos 06 10.1075/z.215.10bos 235 258 24 Chapter 14 01 04 Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers? Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers? 01 04 A first assessment of the linguistic evidence A first assessment of the linguistic evidence 1 A01 01 JB code 144314401 Koen Bostoen Bostoen, Koen Koen Bostoen UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent) 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/144314401 2 A01 01 JB code 474314402 Joseph Koni Muluwa Koni Muluwa, Joseph Joseph Koni Muluwa UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent) 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/474314402 01 eng 30 00 Popular belief has it that the Bantu Expansion was a farming/language dispersal. However, there is neither conclusive archaeological nor linguistic evidence to substantiate this hypothesis, especially not for the initial spread in West-Central Africa. In this chapter we consider lexical reconstructions for both domesticated and wild plants in Proto-West-Coastal Bantu associated with the first Bantu speech communities south of the rainforest about 2500 years ago. The possibility to reconstruct terms for five different crops, i.e. pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum), okra (Hibiscus/Abelmoschus esculentus), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata), Bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranea) and plantain (Musa spp.), indicates that by that time Bantu speakers did know how to cultivate plants. At the same time, they still strongly depended on the plant resources that could be collected in their natural environment, as is evidenced by a preliminary assessment of reconstructible names for wild plants. Agriculture in Central Africa was indeed “a slow revolution”, as the late Jan Vansina once proposed, and certainly not the principal motor behind the early Bantu Expansion. 01 01 JB code z.215.11jos 06 10.1075/z.215.11jos 259 274 16 Chapter 15 01 04 Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal 1 A01 01 JB code 556314403 Brian D. Joseph Joseph, Brian D. Brian D. Joseph The Ohio State University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/556314403 01 eng 30 00 Analysis of agricultural vocabulary remains one of the most compelling methodologies bearing on Renfrew’s Farming/Language Dispersal Hypothesis, by which the reconstructed lexicon for a proto-language of a well-dispersed language family is predicted to contain several agricultural items. Mostly, though, this methodology has involved noting the presence or absence of particular lexical items for a given proto-language and drawing inferences from that, or working out root derivations and drawing appropriate inferences. I propose here two new types of lexically based argument, by way of expanding the methodology of lexical examination and analysis, looking first at derivational processes involved in the creation of relevant words and the meaning that such processes add to the derivative, and then at religious rituals and mythology to examine the embedding of agricultural vocabulary into the religious practices and mythological tales associated with early Indo-European culture. Ultimately, then, I argue that it is not enough to just look at the meanings of particular words and to try to develop a sense of what they originally meant, nor is it enough to determine the source of the words (derivation, etymology). Rather, one also has to look at how the words were used, what is reconstructible about the use and form of the word, and what the cultural context was for the words. Only then can insights derived from lexical examination be used in developing a sense of prehistory. 01 01 JB code z.215.12kum 06 10.1075/z.215.12kum 275 290 16 Chapter 16 01 04 Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian 1 A01 01 JB code 620314404 Martin Joachim Kümmel Kümmel, Martin Joachim Martin Joachim Kümmel Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/620314404 01 eng 30 00 The article investigates the agricultural lexicon of Indo-Iranian, especially its earlier records, and what it may tell us about the spread of farming. After some general remarks on “Neolithic” vocabulary, a short overview of the animal husbandry terminology shows that this field of vocabulary was evidently well-established in Proto-Indo-Iranian, with many cognate terms. Words for cattle, horses, sheep and goats are well developed and mostly inherited, while evidence for pigs is more limited, ad the words for donkey and camel look like common loans. A more extensive discussion of plant terminology reveals that while some generic terms for grain are inherited, more specific words for different kinds of cereals show few inherited terms and/or irregular variation, and the same is even clearer for pulses and some other vegetables. The terminology for agricultural terminology is largely different from that of most European branches of Indo-European. The conclusion is that the cultural background behind these linguistic data points to spreading of a mainly pastoralist culture in the case of Indo-Iranian. 01 01 JB code z.215.13gar 06 10.1075/z.215.13gar 291 311 21 Chapter 17 01 04 Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans 1 A01 01 JB code 557314405 Romain Garnier Garnier, Romain Romain Garnier Université de Limoges and Institut Universitaire de France 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/557314405 2 A01 01 JB code 798314406 Laurent Sagart Sagart, Laurent Laurent Sagart Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/798314406 3 A01 01 JB code 110314407 Benoît Sagot Sagot, Benoît Benoît Sagot Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/110314407 01 eng 30 00 Recent evidence from archaeology and ancient DNA converge to indicate that the Yamnaya culture, often regarded as the bearer of the Proto-Indo-European language, underwent a strong population expansion in the late 4th and early 3rd millennia BCE. It suggests that the underlying reason for that expansion might be the then unique capacity to digest animal milk in adulthood. We examine the early Indo-European milk-related vocabulary to confirm the special role of animal milk in Indo-European expansions. We show that Proto-Indo-European did not have a specialized root for ‘to milk’ and argue that the IE root *h2melg̑- ‘to milk’ is secondary and post-Anatolian. We take this innovation as an indication of the novelty of animal milking in early Indo-European society. Together with a detailed study of language-specific innovations in this semantic field, we conclude that the ability to digest milk played an important role in boosting Proto-Indo-European demography. 01 01 JB code z.215.ai 06 10.1075/z.215.ai 313 313 1 Miscellaneous 18 01 04 Language index Language index 01 eng 01 01 JB code z.215.si 06 10.1075/z.215.si 321 321 1 Miscellaneous 19 01 04 Subject index Subject index 01 eng 01 JB code JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/z.215 Amsterdam NL 00 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 04 01 00 20171221 C 2017 John Benjamins D 2017 John Benjamins 02 WORLD WORLD US CA MX 09 01 JB 1 John Benjamins Publishing Company +31 20 6304747 +31 20 6739773 bookorder@benjamins.nl 01 https://benjamins.com 21 12 18 01 00 Unqualified price 02 JB 1 02 95.00 EUR 02 00 Unqualified price 02 80.00 01 Z 0 GBP GB US CA MX 01 01 JB 2 John Benjamins Publishing Company +1 800 562-5666 +1 703 661-1501 benjamins@presswarehouse.com 01 https://benjamins.com 21 12 18 01 00 Unqualified price 02 JB 1 02 143.00 USD