The "Archaism of the periphery" argument is simply unassailable.
The "Tree" model could never explain the observed phenomenon. It was more of a volcano with continuous lava flows punctuated by periodic explosions.
Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Hittite, Tocharian and Italic are the dialects which, in any generally accepted schedule of migrations, were the first, second and third, respectively, to migrate from the original homeland; and the fact that they share a few isoglosses almost exclusively with each other (in spite of being found at opposite corners of the earliest attested dialectological arrangement), makes it likely that these isoglosses were formed due to interaction between these three dialects in an area near a common exit point from this original homeland as they moved away from that homeland. [The idea of the existence of a common exit point is also necessitated by the linguistic isolation of Hittite from all other branches. According to all the suggested migration schedules, Hittite was the first branch to separate completely from the rest, and all the other branches together developed certain fundamental features in common which are missing from Hittite. Any isoglosses shared by Hittite with some, but not all, of these other branches, are formed only after this initial separation, and could therefore only have been formed outside this common exit point when those branches were also moving out of the common homeland].
The homeland, in fact, must therefore be situated in an area either to the north (the Artic Homeland?) or to the south (the Indian Homeland, or the Anatolian Homeland) of the general Indo-European world: the exit point, leading away from the other dialects, led into the Eurasian zone, from where the three dialects migrated or expanded into their earliest attested areas.
<b>But this cannot be to the north, since the last dialects </b>in the homeland (see earlier), Indo-Aryan, Iranian, Armenian, Greek, and also Albanian as we shall see, <b>are all found in their earliest attested stages, as the southernmost dialects of Indo-European.</b>
<b>The Anatolian Homeland theory, likewise, fails to explain the isoglosses </b>shared by the last branches in the Homeland: Winn points out that <b>the Anatolian theory fails to explain âthe Indo-Iranian problem. </b>..<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The "Tree" model could never explain the observed phenomenon. It was more of a volcano with continuous lava flows punctuated by periodic explosions.
Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Hittite, Tocharian and Italic are the dialects which, in any generally accepted schedule of migrations, were the first, second and third, respectively, to migrate from the original homeland; and the fact that they share a few isoglosses almost exclusively with each other (in spite of being found at opposite corners of the earliest attested dialectological arrangement), makes it likely that these isoglosses were formed due to interaction between these three dialects in an area near a common exit point from this original homeland as they moved away from that homeland. [The idea of the existence of a common exit point is also necessitated by the linguistic isolation of Hittite from all other branches. According to all the suggested migration schedules, Hittite was the first branch to separate completely from the rest, and all the other branches together developed certain fundamental features in common which are missing from Hittite. Any isoglosses shared by Hittite with some, but not all, of these other branches, are formed only after this initial separation, and could therefore only have been formed outside this common exit point when those branches were also moving out of the common homeland].
The homeland, in fact, must therefore be situated in an area either to the north (the Artic Homeland?) or to the south (the Indian Homeland, or the Anatolian Homeland) of the general Indo-European world: the exit point, leading away from the other dialects, led into the Eurasian zone, from where the three dialects migrated or expanded into their earliest attested areas.
<b>But this cannot be to the north, since the last dialects </b>in the homeland (see earlier), Indo-Aryan, Iranian, Armenian, Greek, and also Albanian as we shall see, <b>are all found in their earliest attested stages, as the southernmost dialects of Indo-European.</b>
<b>The Anatolian Homeland theory, likewise, fails to explain the isoglosses </b>shared by the last branches in the Homeland: Winn points out that <b>the Anatolian theory fails to explain âthe Indo-Iranian problem. </b>..<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->