World Families Forums - Post your model for the early spread of R1b across Europe

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 23, 2014, 04:11:45 AM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  Post your model for the early spread of R1b across Europe
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Post your model for the early spread of R1b across Europe  (Read 4490 times)
Curtis Pigman(Pigmon)
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 106


« Reply #50 on: May 08, 2012, 01:31:51 PM »

... (and what I have long thought) is the early dates from the French Midi=the south of France.  That is a much better match for the variance and also geographically more likely if you are looking for a point where beaker could have come into existence in western Europe and radiated out from using the Rhone, Rhine, Med., Loire and Danube.  

I don't know where L11, P312, U106, etc. arose, but I agree with you and RRocca's general theme that there was expansion of L11 based folks from SE France/the West Alps.

That doesn't mean that was the start for L11, though, or L51. It could be.  It would be nice to figure out where this started. If it was really Anatolia, the Lower Danube or even in the Steppes or Caucasus.  It may have been just L23* then.  I don't know.

I tend to agree with most of this analysis as well.  My L-2+ Fits with these populations.  In Genebase they have a compilation of 12 different population studies (32,374 Indigenous Individuals) with selected markers in each one.  My comparison yields the highest RMI (Relative Match Index) and my highest scores, besides U.S. Caucasion are Northern Portugal (41.87) and Tyrol, Austria/Northern Italy(35.69).  Other significant matches are Ibizia, Corsica, and Sardinia.

Instead of spreading by land is it possible that these populations are related by trading by water (except for Tyrol of course which is high in the mountains)?

Anyone know of a correlation between Northern Portugal and Tyrol?
« Last Edit: May 08, 2012, 01:50:10 PM by Curtis Pigman(Pigmon) » Logged

R1b1a2a1a1b3c3a L2+ Z49+ Z142+ (L20-,L196-,and L562-)
ysearch.org ID ZHHCY

Website:  curtisnsissy.tripod.com
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #51 on: May 08, 2012, 04:21:59 PM »

I doubt the steepes is the origin. There is very little in Central Asia.
Logged
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #52 on: June 06, 2012, 12:15:49 PM »

In a paper published in
Proceedings of the Academy of DNA Genealogy
Boston-Moscow-Tsukuba
Volume 5, No. 2
February 2012

Page 38

New Understanding of Western Eurasia in Prehistoric Times.
Anton Perdih*, Petr Jandáček

Abstract
Politics of European dynasties of the 19th Century AD had an inordinate impact
upon the nomenclature of the then emerging field of linguistics. One trivial
isogloss - for "One Hundred" in Avestian "Satem" and in Latin "Centum/Kentum"
had become sacrosanct for many as the absolute divide between two forms of
"Indo-Germanic" languages. Yet another basic tenant of the 19th Century
understanding was that the Slavs arrived in central Europe only recently. There
is no evidence concerning the migrations of Slovenes or Macedonians during the
6th or 7th Centuries AD. Such mythology of migrations was fabricated between
the 15th and 20th Century AD and has no documentation. There is ample evidence
for the arrival of all of the neighbors of the Slovenes. There is also evidence for
the migration of most of the neighbors of the Macedonians. Written sources of
that time present explicitly that Slovenes were also called “Veneti”. Some data
indicate that part of the ancestors of present Slovenes arrived from the southeast
of Balkans, where they were the aboriginal settlers. "Genetic" data indicate that
Slovenes are a mix of three main groups and some of their ancestors lived in
their territories prior to 40,000 years ago. For a better understanding of Europe in
antiquity it is imperative to establish as a fact that the ancestors of the Slovenes
had resided in central Europe for thousands of years. There is increasingly more
evidence that the older versions of all Indo-European languages are more like
Slovene than are their more modern forms. The Kentum I-E languages are
derived from Satem ones and not vice versa. These events did not proceed
through internal developments in the proto-Slavic I-E languages, but primarily
by the influence of proto-Slavic on neighbouring non-I-E languages and vice
versa. Subsequently, it was followed by elite dominance effect of some of the
newly formed Kentum groups over some of the Satem ones. A new system of
understanding the Indo-European Languages as "Core" and "Peripheral" is
proposed for the 21st Century. We reach an understanding of true agriculture
from foundations of proto-Slavic hunters, gatherers, fishers, and other preagrarian
economies. This Proto-Slavic phenomenon is manifest not only in lands
now occupied by Slavs but also in Asia Minor, Levant, and Egypt. Proto-Slavs in
Europe had a profound linguistic influence in antiquity. This Proto-Slavic
element is made conspicuous in this thesis from the British Isles to Anatolia and
from the Baltic Slope to the Italian peninsula and western Europe. The Proto-
Slavic preeminence had been replaced by Hellenic, Roman and Germanic in
more recent centuries.

This paper has an interesting section that proposes a new Unified Proto Indo European Theory (UPIET). Starting at Page 80.

http://aklyosov.home.comcast.net/~aklyosov/

PDF at:
http://aklyosov.home.comcast.net/5-2%202012.pdf
Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #53 on: June 06, 2012, 07:55:27 PM »

Quote
The Kentum I-E languages are derived from Satem ones and not vice versa. The Kentum I-E languages are derived from Satem ones and not vice versa.

I don't believe that statement represents the consensus of linguistic opinion. The lengthy quote it was taken from sounds like some sort of Pan-Slavic propaganda more than anything else.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2012, 07:56:19 PM by rms2 » Logged

Arch Y.
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


« Reply #54 on: June 07, 2012, 12:50:00 AM »

I doubt the steepes is the origin. There is very little in Central Asia.

I have a question to the SW Asian component that all Western R1b for which people like Dieneke's speak of.  What exactly is that component and what region of SW Asia specifically signals that component to R1b in Western Europe???????  What SW Asian people does Western European R1b closely relate to?????  Obviously the SW Asian people do not possess any R1b components so how do we know where we connect????

Arch
Logged
Arch Y.
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


« Reply #55 on: June 07, 2012, 01:00:05 AM »

Quote
The Kentum I-E languages are derived from Satem ones and not vice versa. The Kentum I-E languages are derived from Satem ones and not vice versa.

I don't believe that statement represents the consensus of linguistic opinion. The lengthy quote it was taken from sounds like some sort of Pan-Slavic propaganda more than anything else.

I'm glad that I'm not the only one that is seeing an agenda from certain people who seem to be very well educated on genetics.  It's hard enough to get the facts and prove the real scientific data without having more flies in the ointment.  I just get a bit irritated when the same flies come from the scientific geneticist community itself all just to create a book in order to make a quick buck.  There should be a ban on funding and research for these scientists who in essence create garbage for profit. Unfortunately some of the culprits of are high up on the food chain in some of the popular genomic testing companies and even universities.  Where's the science?

Arch
Logged
Arch Y.
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


« Reply #56 on: June 07, 2012, 01:30:33 AM »

In a paper published in
Proceedings of the Academy of DNA Genealogy
Boston-Moscow-Tsukuba
Volume 5, No. 2
February 2012


I found this little gem in this travesty of a paper that in my opinion is written with an agenda to promote the greatness of Slavic R1a and other non-R1b people of deeper ancestry such haplogroup G, etc.  Here is the gem: "We see also the possibility that the R1b people in Europe persecuted the R1a, I, and G people for centuries after their own bottleneck event."

To the authors: Oh really? So now us R1b are not only ruthless, uneducated and hairy barbarians but under a united front we had the means to persecute people.  We were barely even surviving from our own stupidity and inability to make great monuments, etc, so how could that be?  From my understanding in history, most of the infamous treachery came from the rich, famous and powerful for which many R1a people became.  I would love for the authors of this tripe show me in history where R1b persecuted R1a people.

Thanks for finding this article, now I won't be able to sleep tonight. :-)

Arch
 
Logged
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2115


« Reply #57 on: June 07, 2012, 08:02:57 AM »

I haven’t ever used the word bullshit as others do frequently, but in face of this statements I say: “Bullshit”.

“The Kentum I-E languages are derived from Satem ones and not vice versa. These events did not proceed through internal developments in the proto-Slavic I-E languages, but primarily by the influence of proto-Slavic on neighbouring non-I-E languages and vice-versa”.

To say this does mean to have no idea of Glottology: no language all over the world knows  Ky from sh but sh from ky. IE for "100" is *Kymtom. Hope that Anatole Klyosov isn't beyond this paper. I have criticized him for many things, but I esteem him too. If he has something to do with this statement, I'll begin to say again: "A massive waste of time".


« Last Edit: June 07, 2012, 11:02:00 AM by Maliclavelli » Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #58 on: June 07, 2012, 08:27:46 AM »

In a paper published in
Proceedings of the Academy of DNA Genealogy
Boston-Moscow-Tsukuba
Volume 5, No. 2
February 2012


I found this little gem in this travesty of a paper that in my opinion is written with an agenda to promote the greatness of Slavic R1a and other non-R1b people of deeper ancestry such haplogroup G, etc.  Here is the gem: "We see also the possibility that the R1b people in Europe persecuted the R1a, I, and G people for centuries after their own bottleneck event."

To the authors: Oh really? So now us R1b are not only ruthless, uneducated and hairy barbarians but under a united front we had the means to persecute people.  We were barely even surviving from our own stupidity and inability to make great monuments, etc, so how could that be?  From my understanding in history, most of the infamous treachery came from the rich, famous and powerful for which many R1a people became.  I would love for the authors of this tripe show me in history where R1b persecuted R1a people.

Thanks for finding this article, now I won't be able to sleep tonight. :-)

Arch
 

I have to admit that I missed this due to my speed reading the concepts of the article which when you pointed it out, I was miffed as well. Now to be fair to AK, I couldnt find any similar reference (or did he have that type of tone in his own papers) to the subject in his own papers but it could have been in the Russian language portions. Maybe Anatole Klyosov didnt read the details presented as well?

What do you say Anatole Klyosov?

I still wish to see a deeper review of the the flow of I-E languages into and/or movement through Europe and all opinions are still on the table.
Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
acekon
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 152


« Reply #59 on: June 07, 2012, 09:56:21 AM »

: 0

  
« Last Edit: June 08, 2012, 02:16:52 AM by acekon » Logged

YDNA: R-Z2105* Śląsk-Polska
MtDNA: U5b2a2*Königsberg-Ostpreussen
Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #60 on: June 07, 2012, 10:02:26 AM »

Are the "Academy of DNA Genealogy" and/or the "Russian Academy of DNA Genealogy" legitimate institutions? The home address of the former seems to be a nice two-story colonial in suburban Newton, Massachusetts.

If these "Academies" exist outside of the collective minds of a few, please let me know where so I can arrange a group site visit.
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
Arch Y.
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


« Reply #61 on: June 07, 2012, 03:18:39 PM »

Are the "Academy of DNA Genealogy" and/or the "Russian Academy of DNA Genealogy" legitimate institutions? The home address of the former seems to be a nice two-story colonial in suburban Newton, Massachusetts.

If these "Academies" exist outside of the collective minds of a few, please let me know where so I can arrange a group site visit.

I was browsing Mr. A.K.'s credentials and it reeks of diploma and/or certificate mills.  I would sincerely doubt a person with as much background as him could produce so much crap in the short amount that he has.  Taking a closer look at the dates of his achievements, etc., they all seem to be quite some time ago.  If I recall correctly, not a single one was less than 5 years old; I guess genetics brings out the nuts.  I will pretty much be dismissing anything that has his name attached to it.

Arch
« Last Edit: June 07, 2012, 03:19:10 PM by Arch Y. » Logged
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #62 on: June 07, 2012, 03:26:13 PM »

Are the "Academy of DNA Genealogy" and/or the "Russian Academy of DNA Genealogy" legitimate institutions? The home address of the former seems to be a nice two-story colonial in suburban Newton, Massachusetts.

If these "Academies" exist outside of the collective minds of a few, please let me know where so I can arrange a group site visit.

The good doctor lives in New England.
Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



ironroad41
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 219


« Reply #63 on: June 07, 2012, 03:45:04 PM »

Are the "Academy of DNA Genealogy" and/or the "Russian Academy of DNA Genealogy" legitimate institutions? The home address of the former seems to be a nice two-story colonial in suburban Newton, Massachusetts.

If these "Academies" exist outside of the collective minds of a few, please let me know where so I can arrange a group site visit.

I was browsing Mr. A.K.'s credentials and it reeks of diploma and/or certificate mills.  I would sincerely doubt a person with as much background as him could produce so much crap in the short amount that he has.  Taking a closer look at the dates of his achievements, etc., they all seem to be quite some time ago.  If I recall correctly, not a single one was less than 5 years old; I guess genetics brings out the nuts.  I will pretty much be dismissing anything that has his name attached to it.

Arch

When he first started posting on rootsweb two to three years ago, he wasn't well received.  He talked about his chemical kinetics approach and discounted everyone elses work.  I was and still am skeptical of his results but he has garnered some believers, Didier?, e.g.  Ken and many other of the high powered folks have left rootsweb and Chandlers criticisms of late have been more about presentation than substance, so I can't figure out where he's at.

I like the fact that for long increments of time he uses the 22 slowest dys loci, that just makes sense to me.  I haven't studied where he got his hidden mutations correction factor, but that also makes sense.

He has started a business in the US, taught at a University and is apparently well regarded by his Russian Peers and his papers are accepted for publication, but as he says himself, that, necessarily, doesn't mean too much when you are discussing the subject complexity we have with this problem.

I plan to read his papers this winter and see if I can figure out where he is coming from and try to understand what he really knows.
Logged
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #64 on: June 08, 2012, 09:46:48 AM »

I haven’t ever used the word bullshit as others do frequently, but in face of this statements I say: “Bullshit”.

“The Kentum I-E languages are derived from Satem ones and not vice versa. These events did not proceed through internal developments in the proto-Slavic I-E languages, but primarily by the influence of proto-Slavic on neighbouring non-I-E languages and vice-versa”.

To say this does mean to have no idea of Glottology: no language all over the world knows  Ky from sh but sh from ky. IE for "100" is *Kymtom. ...

I am sure the Trade routes in Pre-history made much differences in the language of trade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans
"Another hypothesis connected with the Black Sea deluge theory suggests that PIE originated as the language of trade between early Neolithic Black Sea tribes.[13] Under this hypothesis, University of Pennsylvania archaeologist Fredrik T. Hiebert proposes that the transition from PIE to IE dispersion occurred during the deluge.[14]"
Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #65 on: June 08, 2012, 10:12:36 AM »

"Another hypothesis connected with the Black Sea deluge theory suggests that PIE originated as the language of trade between early Neolithic Black Sea tribes.[13] Under this hypothesis, University of Pennsylvania archaeologist Fredrik T. Hiebert proposes that the transition from PIE to IE dispersion occurred during the deluge.[14]"

How potty can theories get? No language originates as a language of trade. The only possible exceptions are modern constructed languages such as Esperanto, specifically designed to be an easily-learned language for international communication. The fact that Esperanto has been largely ignored in favour of English as the modern international lingua franca tells us a lot about the way that languages get adopted for such a purpose. A language becomes a lingua franca if it is already widely spoken in the region concerned, or in this case internationally.

The fascination with the Biblical deluge story has generated endless ideas about the origin of the story, which tend to want to give it some huge importance. In fact the Black Sea flood was far earlier than PIE and would have had a minimal impact on surrounding populations. See National origin stories: Deluge.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2012, 10:18:25 AM by Jean M » Logged
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #66 on: June 08, 2012, 10:56:11 AM »

Maybe not "Originated"  but derived and later improved, because, part to its specialization vocabulary PIE may well have spread from a parent to a trade language just as Amerindians did even before Europeans arrived.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobilian_Jargon

"Mobilian Jargon facilitated trade between tribes speaking different languages and European settlers. There is continuing debate as to when Mobilian Jargon first began to be spoken. Some scholars, such as James Crawford, have argued that Mobilian Jargon has its origins in the linguistically diverse environment following the establishment of the French colony of Louisiana. Others, however, suggest that the already linguistically diverse environment of the lower Mississippi basin drove the need for a common method of communication prior to regular contact with Europeans."

The same concept can be considered for Centum-satem isogloss of PIE where traders, ect used simplified syllable and sound structure and a simplified grammar as compared to a primary parent language?
Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #67 on: June 08, 2012, 11:25:01 AM »

The same concept can be considered for Centum-satem isogloss of PIE where traders, ect used simplified syllable and sound structure and a simplified grammar as compared to a primary parent language?

The centum-satem isogloss has nothing to do with simplification. It is a straightforward sound change like many others that constantly occur. It just happens to have attracted a lot more attention than many others because at one time it seemed to divide IE languages geographically into eastern and western. Once it was recognised that Tocharian was centum, that idea had to be given up. The division is not geographical but chronological. The isogloss occurred after the progenitors of many branches of the IE tree had left the homeland, leaving only the rump in which the sound change occurred. That rump eventually broke up into the Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian groups.    
« Last Edit: June 08, 2012, 11:28:18 AM by Jean M » Logged
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #68 on: June 08, 2012, 11:41:46 AM »

The same concept can be considered for Centum-satem isogloss of PIE where traders, ect used simplified syllable and sound structure and a simplified grammar as compared to a primary parent language?

The centum-satem isogloss has nothing to do with simplification. It is a straightforward sound change like many others that constantly occur. It just happens to have attracted a lot more attention than many others because at one time it seemed to divide IE languages geographically into eastern and western. Once it was recognised that Tocharian was centum, that idea had to be given up. The division is not geographical but chronological. The isogloss occurred after the progenitors of many branches of the IE tree had left the homeland, leaving only the rump in which the sound change occurred. That rump eventually broke up into the Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian groups.    


I thought that when mentioning a (specific set of children such as Centum-satem) isogloss represents the fact the discussion is of commonality which both apply to the parent language, and that an isogloss is the geographical boundary of a certain linguistic feature. So I was alluding to the earlier parent language. [Note I am just trying to beginning to understand all of this so please be gental :) ]
Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #69 on: June 08, 2012, 12:03:51 PM »

Sorry if I sounded brusque. The lingua franca concept of language adoption has been hugely popular with anti-migrationists, as it seems to them to remove the need for migration to explain how a language could travel thousands of miles. Of course there is a genuine phenomenon behind all the speculation. The use of a lingua franca in trade and diplomacy is well known and not disputed. Unfortunately the idea can be misused. If you see suggestions of a language originating as a trade language, you know that those putting this forward are not linguists and know nothing about linguistics.

   
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #70 on: June 08, 2012, 12:12:18 PM »

I thought that when mentioning a (specific set of children such as Centum-satem) isogloss represents the fact the discussion is of commonality which both apply to the parent language, and that an isogloss is the geographical boundary of a certain linguistic feature. So I was alluding to the earlier parent language.

I don't follow. The parent language was PIE. Initially it was neither centum nor satem, as can be seen from the Anatolian branch. Then the homeland turned centum. During this period various migrations took place (including one to the east which eventually produced Tocharian.) Because all these migrations left the homeland when it was centum, the resulting families such as Tocharian and Celtic were centum. Then the hard initial k softened, turning the remaining PIE-speakers satem. It seems that there was a dialect continuum with pre-Proto-Balto-Slavic at one end (probably in the Middle Dnieper) and pre-Proto-Indo-Iranian at the other (almost certainly in the Andronovo Culture), before the final break-up of PIE.     
Logged
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #71 on: June 08, 2012, 12:18:54 PM »

It seems to me that the Indo-European languages did not form just by the spontaneous internal development but on geographical interaction other nearby language groups expanding into a regional common language which, by this effect, helped create many isoglosses.

Now here is the Blog from the same guy who co-wrote the paper mentioned in a previous post. I have NO horse in this race so I am just absorbing the information provided to make my own understanding and ignoring the War/domination' suggestions, but which R1b could have just by internal growth.

http://jandacek.com/novel_views.html

Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #72 on: June 08, 2012, 12:34:30 PM »

@ Mark Jost

Languages tend to form from previous languages of course. In most cases we can see splitting from a common ancestor as the chief process at work, but borrowing from languages in contact is very common. In a few cases the interaction between two languages in contact is so strong as to create a synthesis between them, which results in a Creole language.

There is no evidence at all to suggest that PIE is a creole. It is internally consistent. However there is evidence of language contact, particularly with Proto-Uralic. Some of the similarities there are fundamental enough to encourage some linguists to argue for a common ancestor. That is not impossible. Such a common ancestor might have been spoken in Central Asia.

However this really isn't all that important in looking at the splitting of PIE itself into separate IE languages.

Logged
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #73 on: June 08, 2012, 12:35:00 PM »

I thought that when mentioning a (specific set of children such as Centum-satem) isogloss represents the fact the discussion is of commonality which both apply to the parent language, and that an isogloss is the geographical boundary of a certain linguistic feature. So I was alluding to the earlier parent language.

I don't follow. The parent language was PIE. Initially it was neither centum nor satem, as can be seen from the Anatolian branch. Then the homeland turned centum. During this period various migrations took place (including one to the east which eventually produced Tocharian.) Because all these migrations left the homeland when it was centum, the resulting families such as Tocharian and Celtic were centum. Then the hard initial k softened, turning the remaining PIE-speakers satem. It seems that there was a dialect continuum with pre-Proto-Balto-Slavic at one end (probably in the Middle Dnieper) and pre-Proto-Indo-Iranian at the other (almost certainly in the Andronovo Culture), before the final break-up of PIE.     


I am not suggesting Trade first created PIE but it surely had play a roll in its growth.

In the link you provided, 'The satem languages share some innovations in common (particularly, the ruki sound law), while the centum languages have no common innovations, and in fact include the two groups that split off the earliest  ...  while "centumization" was actually a set of unrelated changes occurring independently in multiple language groups."

Words travel, a new listener my hear a new word a few time but then add it to their language base but with a slight change from the original pronunciation heard from a far away visitor causing prominent leap frog change effect.
Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #74 on: June 08, 2012, 12:38:20 PM »


..  while "centumization" was actually a set of unrelated changes occurring independently in multiple language groups."


Oh not more rubbish in Wikipedia! I posted that link in good faith.  You are keeping me busy.  :)
« Last Edit: June 08, 2012, 12:47:52 PM by Jean M » Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.111 seconds with 19 queries.