Single parent dating copper center alaska
The reconstruction of a prehistorical homeland makes use of a variety of disciplines, including archaeology and archaeogenetics.
The concept of a (single, identifiable) "homeland" of a given language family implies a purely genealogical view of the development of languages.
An example is the Etruscan language, which, even though only partially understood, is believed to be related to the Rhaetic language and to the Lemnian language. In the case of the non-Austronesian indigenous languages of Papua New Guinea and the indigenous languages of Australia, there is no published linguistic hypothesis supported by any evidence that these languages have links to any other families. The entire Indo-European family itself is a language isolate: no further connections are known.
This lack of information does not prevent some professional linguists from formulating additional hypothetical nodes (Nostratic) and additional homelands for the speakers.
It is undisputed that fully developed languages were present throughout the Upper Paleolithic, and possibly into the deep Middle Paleolithic (see origin of language, behavioral modernity).
These languages would have spread with the early human migrations of the first "peopling of the world", but they are no longer amenable to linguistic reconstruction.
For example, a creole language may lack significant inflectional morphology, lack tone on monosyllabic words, or lack semantically opaque word formation, even if these features are found in all of the parent languages of the languages from which the creole was formed. That is, they have no well accepted language family connection, no nodes in a family tree, and therefore no known urheimat.This assumption is often reasonable and useful, but it is by no means a logical necessity, as languages are well known to be susceptible to areal change such as substrate or superstrate influence.Over a sufficient period of time, in the absence of evidence of intermediary steps in the process, it may be impossible to observe linkages between languages that have a shared urheimat: given enough time, natural language change will obliterate any meaningful linguistic evidence of a common genetic source.The Nostratic languages theory is the best-known attempt to expand the deep prehistory of the main language families of Eurasia (excepting Sino-Tibetan and the languages of Southeast Asia) to the beginning of the Holocene.First proposed in the early 20th century, the Nostratic theory still receives serious consideration, but it is by no means generally accepted.