(OFFTOPIC from Sea Peoples)

This may be a more plausible assertion if you drop the "a" and just say I2... there are several apparent minor expansions of different I2 around the Black Sea, although the only one that's studied in-depth so far is the I2c-B expansion in Armenians and their neighbors. It's a young clade, and a fairly obvious branch off of a more European clade.

By the way, how yes no, have you had a chance to analyze where I place the modern centers of diversity of different I2a branches in my Paleolithic Remnants map? It seems, although our samples are admittedly biased so far, that we're actually finding the highest diversity of I2a (I call it "I2a1" in the map, since I use Nordtvedt nomenclature) along the Atlantic Fringe... not anywhere near the Black Sea. I suppose you're anticipating high diversity among future samples from the Black Sea area?
good point about that currently it holds more for I2 than for I2a...

and yes I am expecting higher diversity of I2 and I2a in east Europe around Danube, in Caucasus and Asia minor ...
thing is east Europe and Asia are very sparsely sampled.....I expect that we find M26 in currently unexpected places..... and also some haplotypes that will give older tmrca for I2a dinaric ..
 
my point is linguistics cannot tell anything about the tribal names that I am relating into groups of same origin, because we do not know the languages of e.g. Sherdana. Scordisci .... or Serians, Scirii, Cimmerians, white Syrians...or of Gutians who ruled over Sumer.....

Actually, we do not need to know the languages strictly speaking. If you say that these names are related (hypothetically speaking, we can assume that for the moment), we would have to postulate sound laws existing that are responsible for changing these names from one to another, and also, what would be the original form, hypothetically speaking?

š-r-d-n
skordisci
Serian
Skiri
Cimmeri
Syria
So according to this, *ʃ- (š) corresponds to *sk-, corresponds to *s, corresponds to *k (keep in mind that originally in Greek, the name is rendered as "Kimmeroi"). Which one is the original form? I would personally argue *sk-, because it's possible to derive all other forms from this (*sk > *s > *ʃ, or *sk > *k).

Likewise, *d is corresponded by a Ø (missing) in all names except Sherdana and Scordisci. It's more likely that *d is the original form and that it disappeared than a *d suddenly appearing.

Then we have *-mm- in "Cimmeri", which has no equivalent whatsoever elsewhere, yet we must assume it to be also the original form.

We also have a final *n in "Sherdana" which we have no where else.

Amongst the vowels, we have *a = *e = *i = *o = *y. Which one is the original form? It's impossible to tell.

Based on the above, I would personally probably propose that the original form is something along the lines of *sk(V)mm(V)rd(V)n (with "V" representing unknown vowels), which appears just too unlikely to me.

it is clear that linguistics cannot claim that those tribal names are related, nor that they are not...

No, I obviously can't. But that's perhaps my point. As you can see above, it's very unlikely that such a multitude of (in some cases bizarre) sound shifts would have occured, even if such a name was transmitted.

hence I use other tools: geographical spread, genetic correlation and history....

No. You have no way of demonstrating that these names are related, but ad-hoc assume that a relation exists anyways (without knowing wether this is the case or not), and ad-hoc attempt to correlate this with patterns that you see on maps.

finally, a question for you: if you imagine PIE langauges as a tree, where do sound laws exist
1) only between parent branch and a child branch
2) also among child branches and grandchild branches...how?

Sound laws exist everywhere. And, I do not think that the tree model does necessarily explain a language family reasonably well (but neither does the wave model in the same manner), at least, not in the conventional sense: one "node" may have multiple "twigs" sprouting from it simultaneously (the Romance languages are a good example of that).

As I said, sound laws do exist everywhere, multiple "twigs" can also have common sound laws due to an area effect. You have to consider that sound laws also work on dialect level. The German dialect lines are a good example of that: the various sound laws of the second germanic sound shift affect German dialects to varying degrees, and as a result you have the Benrath and Speyer lines, for instance.
 
Actually, we do not need to know the languages strictly speaking. If you say that these names are related (hypothetically speaking, we can assume that for the moment), we would have to postulate sound laws existing that are responsible for changing these names from one to another, and also, what would be the original form, hypothetically speaking?

š-r-d-n
skordisci
Serian
Skiri
Cimmeri
Syria

I did divide those into several groups following finding that haplogroup I in central Asia seems to be only Ib1.

group 1: Scirii, Serians, (white) Syrians, Cimmerians, Sumerians
group 2: Scordisci, Sherdana, Kurds
group 3: Sardis, Sardinia
group 4: Sorbs, Serbs, Sarbans, Serboi

what I claim is only that a population carrying certain race/tribal name can keep its name through long periods and that this can be traced via shared genetics...I do not state that those populations still spoke the same language in times when their names are recorded.. hence I do not claim any of those tribes to have been Slavic or Germanic in times when their names are recorded....

Hope you will agree that this split above is much more likely also from the linguistic point of view...


sound laws of course exist, but they cannot be applied without knowing source language, path through which languages 5the word is captured (e.g. recording it in Greek or latin may have been via intermediary language) and the language in which they are captured, and relations between those languages

I believe groups 2 and 4 are one group (becase Sherdana left location name "Serbonian bog", and due to Scordisci, Sherdana, Kurds located in between Sorbs, Serbs and Sarbans, and due to r1a fitting well in my understanding of scenario related to "bronze age collapse"/"sea peoples")

and I think that group 3 might be related to groups 2 and 4 via I2a people


in group 1, link between Sumerian and Syrian is stated by Strabo and historical evidence suggests that white Syrians are related to Cimmerians as Cimmerians are believed to have settled in Cappadokia while in Strabo's time both tribes of Cappadokians are white Syrians
note also that current version of group 1 name is Sart as those are the people who descend from Serians

regarding possible link between group 1 with other groups note also that Siraces are by some believed to be same as Serboi and that they are located on position where much later (as late as 10th century) tribal names Serban and Krevatas are recorded by Byzantine historians..
 
Last edited:
what I claim is only that a population carrying certain race/tribal name can keep its name through long periods and that this can be traced via shared genetics...I do not state that those populations still spoke the same language in times when their names are recorded.. hence I do not claim any of those tribes to have been Slavic or Germanic in times when their names are recorded....

No, I'm telling you that does not make sense: what you're doing is just pattern-making. You take similar sounding names (without knowing wether they are related or not, you just make the ad-hoc assumption that they must be related in order to fit into your scenario), and then tie them to patterns that you see on Y-Haplogroup maps.

That division of yours into "groups" that you claim to see there is just that: pattern-making, and I find it peculiar that you (again, ad-hoc) put "Sardinia" and "Sherdana" into different groupings despite these are the only two names in the list similar enough to be actually linked (this requires a shift *ʃ > *s, which might have happened when the ethnic name was rendered into Latin, because Latin didn't have the phoneme /ʃ/).

I also find the following peculiar: the theory that the Sherdana were from Sardinia is certainly one of the most plausible ones (the other is that they were Lydians). At the time of the Bronze Age collapse, Sardinia was home to the so-called Nuraghic culture, which appears to have some form of continuity with the earlier Neolithic traditions of Western Europe. Modern Sardinians have an admixture of G2a and I2a-M26, which is a typically Neolithic admixture. Compared to modern-day Europeans, Ötzi, which lived in the Copper Age, autosomally plots closest to modern Sardinians from which we could interfer that modern Sardinians might be fairly representative of Neolithic Europeans. In the end, we do obviously not now if the Sherdana were really Sardinians, but this scenario is nontheless fairly plausible.

Instead, you draw up some kind of extremely unlikely scenario in which the Sherdana are somehow related with Serbians and Kurds, ethnic groups which exist thousands of years later in completely different regions. Because you see this relationship, you postulate that I2a-M26 must somehow have it's origin in eastern Europe or the Near East, despite the fact that there's no evidence that it should be there.

As I said, what you're doing is pattern-making.

sound laws of course exist, but they cannot be applied without knowing source language, path through which languages 5the word is captured (e.g. recording it in Greek or latin may have been via intermediary language) and the language in which they are captured, and relations between those languages

And I tell you that's irrelevant. My point is that if, and only if, name X and Y are somehow related, there has to be a way how to get from X to Y, from a common ancestral Z to X and Y. With the examples I gave you earlier (and, I could also give you more examples), when names are transmitted from one language to the next (regardless of being borrowed, or being given down to a daughter language), they are always subject to change. Sound laws will always apply, wether we know them or not.
 

This thread has been viewed 19974 times.

Back
Top