Timeline for Besides Proto-Indoeuropean, what would be the list of the 10 most acurately reconstructed Proto-languages?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 2021 at 11:20 | comment | added | fdb | @Anixx. Proto-Semitic is not "deep level" as defined here. | |
| Dec 6, 2021 at 7:23 | comment | added | Anixx | Proto-Semitic and Proto-Uralic are quite well reconstructed. | |
| Dec 5, 2021 at 21:06 | answer | added | user6726 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Dec 5, 2021 at 17:36 | comment | added | user6726 | I assume you don't mean mere "suspicion" you mean "strong proof", otherwise PIE is not a deep level family. | |
| Dec 5, 2021 at 17:00 | comment | added | Davius | "deep level" excludes known subfamilies (proto-Germanic, proto-Slavic, proto-Italic). I meant languages groups not suspected to be part of a larger group from the available evidence. | |
| Dec 5, 2021 at 16:58 | comment | added | Draconis♦ | The more recent a reconstruction, generally, the more certain it can be. Proto-Romance is much more certain than Proto-Indo-European, and Proto-Semitic is much more certain than Proto-Afro-Asiatic. | |
| Dec 5, 2021 at 16:56 | comment | added | user6726 | What do you mean by "deep level"? What is your metric of depth? | |
| S Dec 5, 2021 at 16:54 | review | First questions | |||
| Dec 6, 2021 at 2:19 | |||||
| S Dec 5, 2021 at 16:54 | history | asked | Davius | CC BY-SA 4.0 |