In this response to the article Archaeology, Language, and the Question of Sámi Ethnogenesis by Asgeir Svestad and Bjørnar Olsen (2023), we correct major misunderstandings made by Svestad and Olsen concerning the methodology of historical linguistics and its relation to archaeology. Our comment concerns the following topics: We explain that there cannot be one ethnogenesis that could be approached by different disciplines because different disciplines are independent and meet only momentarily. We also demonstrate that continuity does not disprove migration, nor vice versa, and explain some methods of linguistic substrate studies that the authors have misunderstood. In Svestad and Olsen’s article, there are also some clearly erroneous statements that we correct in our response. In spite of our critical comments, we genuinely encourage multidisciplinary discussion and cooperation because we share the same research interest: to deepen our understanding of the human past.

中文翻译：

---

对《考古学、语言和萨米民族起源问题》一文的评论

在这篇文章的回复中考古学、语言和萨米民族起源问题由 Asgeir Svestad 和 Bjørnar Olsen (2023) 撰写，我们纠正了 Svestad 和 Olsen 对历史语言学方法及其与考古学关系的主要误解。我们的评论涉及以下主题：我们解释说，不可能存在一种可以由不同学科来研究的民族发生，因为不同学科是独立的并且只是暂时相遇。我们还证明，连续性并不能反驳移民，也不能反驳移民。反之亦然，并解释了一些作者误解的语言基底研究方法。在Svestad和Olsen的文章中，也有一些明显错误的表述，我们在回应中予以纠正。尽管我们提出批评意见，但我们真诚地鼓励多学科讨论与合作，因为我们有着相同的研究兴趣：加深对人类过去的理解。