Main Errors of the Stammbaumtheorie
1. Genetic
kinship is determined according to lexical cognates, which are mostly loans
from neighbouring languages. The intersections between two overlapping
languages are mistaken for real genetic links. 2. Divergence,
bifurcation and binary splitting are considered to be the only decisive
models of linguistic development. Ethnic genealogies stand in no relation to
the prehistoric migrations of archaeological cultures. 3. Any
two neighbouring languages are likely to be claimed to have a common ancestor
proto-language (Ursprache). Their
reconstructions are amalgams of several incompatible phonologies and
morphologies. 4. Assimilated
medieval nations are identified mechanically with prehistoric tribes and
assimilated medieval national languages are considered erroneously as pure
prehistoric tongues. 5. Secondary
unity in mixed amalgams of recent date is considered as the original unity
and the starting-point of linguistic evolution. 6. The
medieval or recent historical state of affairs is equalled with
the prehistoric state. The superficial chaos of recent phenomena
is passed off as the essential order at the original stage. 7. The
lawful and systematic character of cultural phenomena is denied, the occurrence
of inconsistent and incoherent traits in modern mixed cultures fosters the
belief in an unsystematic and accidental distribution of different traits in
ancient communities. 8. Consistent
typological traits in ancient languages are neglected incoherent clusters in
modern languages are viewed as integrated wholes. Modern cultural phenomena
are given a synchronic description as integrated coherent wholes without
realising that they contain incoherent relics of many different and
heterogeneous cultures of older
date.
9. The
real chronological sequence of historical events is reversed: amalgamated and
mixed products of secondary assimilation are passed off as Urpsrachen and phenomena of original
primary unity. 10. All
cultural and linguistic phenomena are given short terms for development, all
languages and tribes arose after the Völkerwanderung,
the Indo-Europeans are believed to have differentiated into the Nordic, Laponoid, Dinaric and
Mediterranean race within five hundred years. 11.
The origins of ancient tribes are dated to the beginnings of our era when the tribal society was decaying and merged into assimilated
nations.
12.
All prehistoric cultures are believed to be extinct and dead. Their place was
taken by living tribes seen as new outgrowths of medieval date. 13. Accounts
of prehistory neglect principles of genetic and cultural stability,
archaeological cultures are believed to change rapidly as fashions and vogues
without any relation to the ethnic identity of their bearers. 14. Although
there is evidence of huge cultural and linguistic diversity among all living
aborigines (in 15. Changes
of archaeological cultures in a territory are not attributed to new
migrations but only to transient fashions haunting the same population.
16. All
considerations on historical grammar are confined to literary languages
without considering the pronunciation of spoken speech and the geographic
distribution of living oral dialects. 17. Dialects
are believed to have sprung up by isolation from the medieval national
languages, though they arose as islets of earlier tribal
languages.
18. Regional
ethnography and geographic dialectography are
neglected as unimportant for historical grammar and comparative
linguistics.
19. Cultures
are not studied in the natural integrity of their manifestations but as
isolated series of data reflecting the diversity of studies at modern
universities. Anthropology, archaeology, ethnography and comparative
linguistics develop mutually incompatible accounts of prehistory. Their
independent evolutionary categories are not related to one ancient people. 20. Tribal
migrations are completely left
out of consideration although
almost all historically evidenced ethnic explosions involved vast long-range travels and dispersions all over whole
continents.
21. The
competition and balancing
between different tribal
castes and their dialects
within one country that resulted in changes of the administrative literary linguistic standard are
mistaken for ‘historical sound shifts’ inside one
‘national language’. (An extract
from Pavel Bělíček: Prehistoric Dialects I, 2004, ISBN
80-86580-05-9,
pp. 14-15) |