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

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 20, 2014, 01:17:56 PM
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 5263 times)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #75 on: June 08, 2012, 01:01:43 PM »

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.

Certainly new words can be borrowed and may be pronounced oddly by their new speakers, but that is not what causes something like the centum-satem isogloss. It does not affect just one word. It is a consistent sound change throughout the language. Think of it more as a dialect or an accent - a way of speaking. Such a change might come about through language contact, perhaps the absorption of a number of non native speakers, who speak the language with an accent derived from their native tongue. But these changes can occur for no apparent reason.    

We can certainly see a lot of evidence of contact between Andronovo and the BMAC, which seems to have resulted in the Indo-Iranian branch acquiring a lot of new vocabulary, so that is one possible language contact that might have caused some sound shifts in the PIE rump.  
« Last Edit: June 08, 2012, 01:05:31 PM by Jean M » Logged
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #76 on: June 08, 2012, 01:30:16 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.  :)
I check Wiki historical edits and this add text has stood untouched for over a year and a half.

This was edited by User:Benwing on 23:57, 10 December 2010
Who is a graduate student in Linguistics at the University of Texas, Austin, focusing on computational linguistics and natural language processing. Who says "Much of my Wikipedia work in the past has been on topics relevant to historical linguistics and ancient languages of various sorts"

He has also posted in the Proto-Indo-European language: wrote section on verbs, much other work.

Either no other Linguistics Master has the chops to dispute or no other Linguistics expert reads Wikipedia.

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)
razyn
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 405


« Reply #77 on: June 08, 2012, 02:33:39 PM »

UT Austin used to have some of the heavy hitters in that field, on its faculty.  I was there 30 years ago, so my info isn't current, but I'd think that's still one of the better schools for linguistics.
Logged

R1b Z196*
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #78 on: June 08, 2012, 03:22:01 PM »

Folks - never mind who wrote it. Does it make sense to you? Really? Think about this.

I meanwhile will attempt to dig out something recent from a linguist on this and supply that reference to Wikipedia.
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #79 on: June 08, 2012, 03:28:00 PM »

OK - K Shields, A New Look at the Centum/Satem Isogloss, Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschun (1981) points out the problem with the old idea that this marks a western/eastern division of PIE before the daughter branches broke away.
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #80 on: June 08, 2012, 03:37:12 PM »

Carlos Quiles, Fernando López-Menchero, A Grammar of Modern Indo-European, 3rd edn. (2011)  is probably the best bet for a modern, easily available source. Page 21 lays out the linguistic evidence for the sequence from centum to satem. You can read it online.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2012, 03:38:06 PM by Jean M » Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #81 on: June 09, 2012, 01:25:32 PM »

Carlos Quiles, Fernando López-Menchero, A Grammar of Modern Indo-European, 3rd edn. (2011)  is probably the best bet for a modern, easily available source. Page 21 lays out the linguistic evidence for the sequence from centum to satem. You can read it online.


Is there any truth to the theory that Balto-Slavic is not completely Satemized and that Satemization probably rose near the Easern fringes of Yamn explaining why Indo-Iranian is considered fully Satemized?
Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #82 on: June 09, 2012, 01:27:10 PM »

OK - K Shields, A New Look at the Centum/Satem Isogloss, Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschun (1981) points out the problem with the old idea that this marks a western/eastern division of PIE before the daughter branches broke away.

That makes sense. Balto-Slavic is still close to Germanic and Celtic than Indo-Iranian.
Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #83 on: June 09, 2012, 01:28:51 PM »

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.

Certainly new words can be borrowed and may be pronounced oddly by their new speakers, but that is not what causes something like the centum-satem isogloss. It does not affect just one word. It is a consistent sound change throughout the language. Think of it more as a dialect or an accent - a way of speaking. Such a change might come about through language contact, perhaps the absorption of a number of non native speakers, who speak the language with an accent derived from their native tongue. But these changes can occur for no apparent reason.    

We can certainly see a lot of evidence of contact between Andronovo and the BMAC, which seems to have resulted in the Indo-Iranian branch acquiring a lot of new vocabulary, so that is one possible language contact that might have caused some sound shifts in the PIE rump.  

Wat do you think the BMAC language was? I have heard theories of connections to the IVC, Elamtie, NE Caucasian languages and Afro-Asiatic/Semitic.
Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #84 on: June 09, 2012, 01:41:28 PM »

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.

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.     

How does that fit with genetics? R1a-M458+ is recent but the majority of Balts and Slavs are R1a-Z280+/R1a-Z283+. The majority of Indo-Iranian R1a is R1a-Z93+, L342.2, L567+ I believe.

Would the R1a at the point this continuum or ancestor of Bat lo-Slavic and Indo-Iranian existed have been mostly Z645+? There are trace amounts of Z280+/Z283+ in Central Asia so there is no concrete answer.


@ 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.




Central Asia here is defined as?

Is a common ancestor accepted? And what ydna would those people been?
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #85 on: June 09, 2012, 01:47:03 PM »

Is there any truth to the theory that Balto-Slavic is not completely Satemized

Yes.

Quote
and that Satemization probably rose near the Eastern fringes of Yamna explaining why Indo-Iranian is considered fully Satemized?

That certainly makes sense to me, and is the reason that I suggested language contact with the BMAC as a possible pressure, but we must be  cautious. The language of the BMAC does not survive and left no written records, so it is only educated deduction by linguists that this was the source of the non-IE vocabulary that entered Proto-Indo-Iranian and then even more entered Indic. As a non-linguist I am unsure whether there is any evidence in that vocabulary that would support a pressure to the satem sound-shift.  
Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #86 on: June 09, 2012, 01:57:04 PM »

Is there any truth to the theory that Balto-Slavic is not completely Satemized

Yes.

Quote
and that Satemization probably rose near the Eastern fringes of Yamna explaining why Indo-Iranian is considered fully Satemized?

That certainly makes sense to me, and is the reason that I suggested language contact with the BMAC as a possible pressure, but we must be  cautious. The language of the BMAC does not survive and left no written records, so it is only educated deduction by linguists that this was the source of the non-IE vocabulary that entered Proto-Indo-Iranian and then even more entered Indic. As a non-linguist I am unsure whether there is any evidence in that vocabulary that would support a pressure to the satem sound-shift.  

The other possibility is that the non IE vocabulary stems from Elamites and the IVC languages and those two were related causing more influence in Indic as the IVC occupied a greater part of Indo-Aryan areas vs Elamites occupying a small area in Iran. Your scenario is of course more plausible as it also explains why the non IE vocabulary is found in Central Asian and Iranian plateau languages and doesn't rely on Elamite-Dravidian relationship that is questionable.

I suspect deep down satemization is an Indo-Iranian feature and Northeast Iranian speakers had something to do with Satemization being spread to Balto-Slavic.
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #87 on: June 09, 2012, 01:58:27 PM »

Central Asia here is defined as?

Is a common ancestor accepted?  And what ydna would those people been?

As I said - some linguists lean towards the idea of a common language. That means that others do not. They prefer the idea of linguistic borrowing.  

As for location, people spread northwards in the Mesolithic as the glaciers melted and herds of cold-adapted animals such as reindeer moved north. Y-DNA haplogroup N presents the appearance of having  spread northwards from South-East Asia. It appears among Uralic speakers.

It is pretty clear that Y-DNA R did not come from so far east, but could have encountered that movement somewhere in Central Asia. Personally I continue to favour the idea that some R at least "overwintered" around the southern Caspian. But who knows.


Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #88 on: June 09, 2012, 02:13:56 PM »

Central Asia here is defined as?

Is a common ancestor accepted?  And what ydna would those people been?

As I said - some linguists lean towards the idea of a common language. That means that others do not. They prefer the idea of linguistic borrowing.  

As for location, people spread northwards in the Mesolithic as the glaciers melted and herds of cold-adapted animals such as reindeer moved north. Y-DNA haplogroup N presents the appearance of having  spread northwards from South-East Asia. It appears among Uralic speakers.

It is pretty clear that Y-DNA R did not come from so far east, but could have encountered that movement somewhere in Central Asia. Personally I continue to favour the idea that some R at least "overwintered" around the southern Caspian. But who knows.




That South Caspian theory sounds right to me. It seems we are defining Central Asia as part of Asian areas of Russia as opposed to the Stans. I would love to see some ancient Central Asian DNA. The Keltiminar culture we talked about in addition to botai . I have heard theories of it being Proto Altaic as well in addition to being from South asia. In addition to the Uralic theory.

But any idea where the minute amounts of N in South Asia, central Asia and iran come from?

Recent Turkic movements, finno ugric admixture picked up by Indo-Iranians, ancient hunter gatherers or Uralic speaking cultures in Central Asia?

What about the small frequencies of I in Central Asia and Iran?

Does R1a inE astern Europe appear to be the native hunter gatherer lineage or a West Asian neolithic lineage that acquired Northern European admixture from the ydna I and N tribes there first?
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #89 on: June 09, 2012, 03:25:02 PM »

Just a friendly reminder. This thread is supposed to be about the spread of R1b.
Logged
acekon
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 152


« Reply #90 on: June 09, 2012, 03:41:06 PM »

@Interested in History

Maybe you should go and communicate with "Newtoboard" and Eurogenes founder along with  Iraqi R1a/linguist specialists and other Poles and "aR1ans" as they like to term themselves at "Forum Biodiversity".

As has been pointed out to you, this board is about R1b  
« Last Edit: June 09, 2012, 03:42:40 PM by acekon » Logged

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

Posts: 186


« Reply #91 on: June 09, 2012, 05:55:28 PM »

@Interested in History

Maybe you should go and communicate with "Newtoboard" and Eurogenes founder along with  Iraqi R1a/linguist specialists and other Poles and "aR1ans" as they like to term themselves at "Forum Biodiversity".

As has been pointed out to you, this board is about R1b  

Maybe you should cut out your stupid trolling out and head on over to Eupedia or another similar board and talk about how European and Paleolithic R1b is as is the norm over there.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2012, 05:57:08 PM by intrestedinhistory » Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #92 on: June 09, 2012, 09:45:09 PM »

That South Caspian theory sounds right to me. It seems we are defining Central Asia as part of Asian areas of Russia as opposed to the Stans. I would love to see some ancient Central Asian DNA. The Keltiminar culture we talked about in addition to botai . I have heard theories of it being Proto Altaic as well in addition to being from South asia. In addition to the Uralic theory.

But any idea where the minute amounts of N in South Asia, central Asia and iran come from?

Recent Turkic movements, finno ugric admixture picked up by Indo-Iranians, ancient hunter gatherers or Uralic speaking cultures in Central Asia?

What about the small frequencies of I in Central Asia and Iran?

Does R1a inE astern Europe appear to be the native hunter gatherer lineage or a West Asian neolithic lineage that acquired Northern European admixture from the ydna I and N tribes there first?

A lot of speculations and a lot of questions.

No problem with that, but perhaps an R1b subclades forum is not the best for this.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
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 0.083 seconds with 18 queries.