Abstract
Pagel et al. (1) claim support for a putative “Eurasiatic” macrofamily of languages and a dispersal ∼14,450 BP. Yet their “data”— claimed reconstructions of Proto-Eurasiatic wordforms in the Languages of the World Etymological Database (LWED)—are not actually data in any sense that either the natural sciences or mainstream linguistics would recognize. They are subjective interpretations, not amenable to independent validation or replication, and widely rejected as vacuous by specialists in language reconstruction (2).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
