Editor for this issue: <>
Dear Colleagues-- The Tocharians *have* been mentioned in connection with the mummies in Xinjiang; Victor Mair looked into the possibility pretty extensively, Mr. Hadingham phone-interviewed me for his article in *Discover*, and he was extraordinarily careful to quote me accurately and get it straight. What it boils down to is this. The mummies are certainly in the same area that Tocharian mss. have been found--the northern arm of the silk road, between the Tian Shan and the Takla Makan--but they're very much earlier; the mss. date from about the 6th through the 8th cc. of the Common Era. What we really need to know is *when* the Tocharians got to where we find them in (what in Europe would be) the early middle ages. I understand there isn't a great deal of historical evidence; what there is is summarized in one of the first papers in Werner Winter's collection *Tocharica* (Poznan, 1984). What *is* clear is that the Tocharian languages have been in contact with various Iranian languages for a very long time. In addition to the very large number of Sanskrit loanwords in both TA and TB (and a much smaller number of Prakrit loans), there are at least three identifiable strata of Iranian loans. The most recent stratum are Khotanese; they could have been borrowed in Xinjiang, since Khotan is on the *southern* arm of the silk road, between the Takla Makan and the northern borders of Tibet. An earlier stratum looks Baktrian and may show some connection of the Tocharians with the Kushana kingdom, which flourished in (roughly) Afghanistan, I think in about the 1st c. of the C.E.; but the nature of the connection isn't very clear--were the Tocharians dwellers *in* the K. kingdom, or outlying allies to the north (therefore maybe already in Xinjiang, but maybe not), or just trading partners with extensive cultural contacts? Finally, there is a tiny handful of loans that look eerily like pre-Proto- Ossetic--therefore possibly Scythian (!)--and suggest that the Tocharians were part of one of those loose confederations that were endemic to the steppes until comparatively recently. But of course localizing such a confederation is hopeless; it may not seem very likely that the Tocharians were still part of a (mainly) Iranian horde when they first entered Xinjiang, but it *is* possible. For more info on the loanwords, see Werner Winter's 1971 article in *Donum indogermanicum* (the fs. for Anton Scherer, edited by Robert Schmitt-Brandt); Abaev's book of 1965, *Skifo-evropejskie izoglossy*, is interesting but more speculative. As for who those mummies were: sure, they might have been (pre-) Tocharians, but bear in mind that anyplace the Tocharians were in their prehistory, Iranians probably were also. So far as I can see, that's as far as reasonable inferences can take us at the moment. --Don RingeMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
In 5.377, Natalie (Maynor?) writes from Rudy Troike's email address: Here are some e-mail addresses for NPR. I hope people will follow Dennis's suggestion of protesting. I may do it, although I'm afraid my anger will end up making my protest less coherent. Anti-Southern bias is one of very few things in the world that evoke anger in me. The only thing that makes me even angrier than anti-Southern bias is the even more specific anti-Mississippi bias. Like many Southerners, I feel what is perhaps an irrationally strong attachment to my state. Excuse me, but what in the name of Panini are you talking about? My search of this year's LINGUIST mailings fails to turn up any mention of Southern speech or anything relevant about NPR. Who is Dennis and what is the evidence for NPR's alleged bias against Southern, and especially Mississippi, speech? Your discourse anaphora lacks an antecedent. (I suspect that "Dennis's" posting was to another list and Natalie accidentally or mistakenly cross-posted her reply to this one.) Mark A. Mandel Dragon Systems, Inc. : speech recognition : +1 617 965-5200 320 Nevada St. : Newton, Mass. 02160, USA : markMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuedragonsys.com
After getting several notes from people asking me about NPR and anti- Southern bias, I discovered that something I wrote as part of an ongoing discussion on ADS-L (American Dialect Society) had been forwarded to LINGUIST by somebody else. The purpose of this note is to let you know that (1) I did not even hear the offensive NPR broadcast, (2) I posted the NPR addresses on ADS-L in response to somebody's request for them, (3) I posted nothing whatsoever to LINGUIST about NPR, (4) I'll go back through old ADS-L mail later and try to reply to those who have inquired about the discussion -- I don't have time to do that right now because I'm out of town, tying up somebody else's phone line and using my mushy- keyed laptop. --Natalie (maynorMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuera.msstate.edu)
I'm sorry for wrongly accusing Natalie of this confusing post, but when I saw her signature and email address in the LINGUIST posting I inferred (mistakenly, as it now appears) that she was, for some unmentioned reason, posting from someone else's account -- as sometimes happens -- and giving her own address in the text to facilitate replies. I have not yet heard from Rudy Troike, who is apparently the responsible party. Mark A. Mandel Dragon Systems, Inc. : speech recognition : +1 617 965-5200 320 Nevada St. : Newton, Mass. 02160, USA : markMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuedragonsys.com