| Part ofa series on |
| Indo-European topics |
|---|
 |
Extant Extinct Reconstructed Hypothetical
Grammar Other |
Archaeology Chalcolithic (Copper Age) Pontic Steppe Caucasus East Asia Eastern Europe Northern Europe Bronze Age Northern/Eastern Steppe Europe
South Asia Iron Age Europe Caucasus Central Asia India |
Peoples and societies Bronze Age Iron AgeIndo-Aryans Iranians Nuristanis East Asia Europe Middle Ages Europe Indo-Aryan Iranian |
Religion and mythology |
 Category |
Thebeech argument (German:Buchenargument) is a now mostly outdated argument inIndo-European studies that is in favour of placing theIndo-EuropeanUrheimat in an area west of a line connectingKaliningrad and theBlack Sea, based on the current distribution ofEuropean beech trees.[1][2] The argument, as summarised by Friedrich and Mallory goes that the Indo-European term *bʰāg(ó) most probably refers to the beech tree. Hence the presence of descendants of the term *bʰāg(ó) in Italic, Germanic, Albanian, Greek and (Indo-)Iranian, and potentially Celtic, Slavic, and Baltic, indicates that this word belonged to the Proto-Indo-European language. And thirdly that since the beech tree distribution was limited historically to the regions west of theEurasian Steppe, this is where this language was spoken.[3][4]
However much like thesalmon problem, this is now an outdated argument, based on many factors including that the historical distribution of the beech trees was different from that of today, with certain species potentially extending to theDon River or to theCaucasus, due to the beech being climatically sensitive, and that with the exception of theKurdishbuz, these words for beech are only found in Western Indo-European languages.[5]
 | ThisIndo-European languages-related article is astub. You can help Wikipedia byadding missing information. |