A comprehensive summary of the Nostratic Hypothesis as of 2011, providing (1) the basis for the reconstruction of Proto-Nostratic as presented by Allan Bomhard, Vladislav M. Illič-Svityč, Aharon B. Dolgopolsky, Joseph H. Greenberg, and others; (2) a comparative vocabulary of Proto-Indo-European stems with proposed Nostratic etymologies and cognates from other branches of Nostratic; (3) a systematic evaluation of the material contained in Aharon Dolgopolsky¿s Nostratic Dictionary.

The “Nostratic” hypothesis — positing a common linguistic ancestor for a wide range of language families including Indo-European, Uralic, and Afro-Asiatic — has produced one of the most enduring and often intense controversies in linguistics. Overwhelmingly, though, both supporters of the hypothesis and those who reject it have not dealt directly with one another’s arguments. This volume brings together selected representatives of both sides, as well as a number of agnostic historical linguists, with the aim of examining the evidence for this particular hypothesis in the context of distant genetic relationships generally. The volume contains discussion of variants of the Nostratic hypothesis (A. Bomhard; J. Greenberg; A. Manaster-Ramer, K. Baertsch, K. Adams, & P. Michalove), the mathematics of chance in determining the relationships posited for Nostratic (R. Oswalt; D. Ringe), and the evidence from particular branches posited in Nostratic (L. Campbell; C. Hodge; A. Vovin), with responses and additional discussion by E. Hamp, B. Vine, W. Baxter and B. Comrie.

Recent developments in aDNA has reshaped our understanding of later European prehistory, and at the same time also opened up for more fruitful collaborations between archaeologists and historical linguists. Two revolutionary genetic studies, published independently in Nature, 2015, showed that prehistoric Europe underwent two successive waves of migration, one from Anatolia consistent with the introduction of agriculture, and a later influx from the Pontic-Caspian steppes which without any reasonable doubt pinpoints the archaeological Yamnaya complex as the cradle of (Core-)Indo-European languages. Now, for the first time, when the preliminaries are clear, it is possible for the fields of genetics, archaeology and historical linguistics to cooperate in a constructive fashion to refine our knowledge of the Indo-European homeland, migrations, society and language. For the historical-comparative linguists, this opens up a wealth of exciting perspectives and new working fields in the intersections between linguistics and neighbouring disciplines, for the archaeologists and geneticists, on the other hand, the linguistic contributions help to endow the material findings with a voice from the past. The present selection of papers illustrate the importance of an open interdisciplinary discussion which will gradually help us in our quest of Tracing the Indo-Europeans.

This volume presents the key examples of morphological correspondences between Indo-European and Semitic languages, afforded by nouns, verbal roots, pronouns, prepositions, and numerals. Its focus is on shared morphology embodied in the cognate vocabulary. The facts that are brought out in this volume do not fit comfortably within either the Indo-Europeanists’ or the Semitists’ conception of the prehistoric development of their languages. Nonetheless they are so fundamental that many would take them for evidence of a single original source, ‘Proto-Nostratic’. In this book, however, it is considered unsettled whether proto-IE and proto-Semitic had a common forerunner. But the IE-Semitic combinations testify at least to prehistoric language communities in truly intimate contact.

The Precursors of Proto-Indo-European contains sixteen contributions that offer the newest insights into the prehistory of Proto-Indo-European, taking the Indo-Anatolian and the Indo-Uralic hypotheses as their point of departure.