Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I don't think there was one European language before IE. Most likely South was speaking Afro-Asiatic/Semitic form brought with first farmers, mostly J2 people, as with E, T and J1. HG I people, hunter-gatherers from North, were speaking some old language, but who knows what? Most likely we can vaguely speculate about 100 words of that origin. We did this exercise in some other thread, but I can't find it at the moment.
There was also long and strong influence of HG G, most likely from Caucas, and who knows what they spoke in Neolithic?
Invention of time machine is highly necessary in this case!
i was thinking of this because of some cognates between some etruscan words and the proto-ugro-finnic languages
there is one man who says adriatic venetic spoke a Finnic ( but not ugric ) language ....see below...its over 360 pages
http://www.paabo.ca/veneti/
while Baltic venedi spoke an old galidian language ( which formed baltic prusian later on ), on another post
:startled: Is this another proofless statement of yours?!while Baltic venedi spoke an old galidian language ( which formed baltic prusian later on ), on another post
i was thinking of this because of some cognates between some etruscan words and the proto-ugro-finnic languages
:startled: Is this another proofless statement of yours?!
If this is just your guess, your own deduction, or someones guess, please, start your sentence from " I guess "I think", "Probably", "I believe" etc. Otherwise people will want the proof, or just make fun of your statement or yourself, knowing that you can't prove it. Other words, you confuse people and, at the same time, make an easy target of yourself.
Now, show us Baltic Veneti's text and its analyses.
Can you Help me?
I mean what this 2 languages were? both IE? or 1 IE and 1 not?
I ask cause I did not understand the Finnic not Ugric (you mean not Magyar?)
i do not understand all yours questions, but venetic is a IE language ( as professors of linguistics indicate) and yes Finnic can be seperated from the Ugric " magyar".
I think it is seperated like baltic-slavic . You can only have baltic, like west-baltic, east -baltic
Finnic languages and Hungarian (Magyar) are much more distantly related than the Blatic and Slavic languages. You have to consider that the Uralic languages are a very old language family: Proto-Uralic was the language of a hunter-gatherer society (note however, that this does not automatically mean that Proto-Uralic was spoken in the Paleolithic!). I remember reading somewhere that the distance between Finnish and Hungarian has been compared to the distance between German and Persian amongst the Indo-European languages.
In any case, I don't think that Etruscan is closely related with the Uralic languages. The most promising I've seen thus far, is trying to link it with one of the Caucasian language families (in particular Northeast Caucasian - the same language family that includes Chechen).
that's very rude indicating I never present a link to what I find even if I do not believe what I attach.
And no this is not my guess, I was purely indicating this part of the statement because many people think all venetic's spoke the same language....and I do not refer only to the eupedia thread but others as well.
If you dislike all the link I attach be them right or wrong, then blame the writers and not me. Who are you to judge what is right or was is wrong. It up to each individual to find out. In regards to the link, even though it is 360 pages long and makes sense in cases, I do not believe it.
In regards to the baltic venedi, I believe they where a baltic people most likely a branch of the lithuanians, lats, kars or samogian people. HGs today prove they are finnic ( thats against what I think)
The line should have read, it was stated ......and I did read it on another link
EDIT - here is the one of the reasons I think they are lithuanian
http://books.google.com.au/books?id...mAW4ybTpBw&ved=0CEQQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=venedi language&f=false
and ( page 450)
http://books.google.com.au/books?id...=2&ved=0CFsQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=venedi&f=false
I'm sorry, but because some historian wrote a book in 1830 (old must be true) with his speculations about Baltic Veneti it is not a proof. Since then we dug, excavated and read all the sources, and thus far, we don't have a clue of what language they spoke? Where did exactly they live (as every historian points to different place, and by width of a modern country lol)? We can't guess their ethnicity, even worse, we can't decide to which culture we should pin them to, Lusatian?
All we can say that most likely they were either celtic, germanic, balto-slavic kind. We don't even know if there name was an exonym or not.
Finnic languages and Hungarian (Magyar) are much more distantly related than the Blatic and Slavic languages. You have to consider that the Uralic languages are a very old language family: Proto-Uralic was the language of a hunter-gatherer society (note however, that this does not automatically mean that Proto-Uralic was spoken in the Paleolithic!). I remember reading somewhere that the distance between Finnish and Hungarian has been compared to the distance between German and Persian amongst the Indo-European languages.
In any case, I don't think that Etruscan is closely related with the Uralic languages. The most promising I've seen thus far, is trying to link it with one of the Caucasian language families (in particular Northeast Caucasian - the same language family that includes Chechen).
in comparison to that there is also the Adygean theory, but both Chechen and Adygean seems to be far from the Historical data, exept the case of a possible Pelasgian road of G HG that starts from Adygeans to south minor Asia and then to Italy,
although it seems that the G HG of minor asia and Etruscans is a bit different?
So when you say Chechen we Speak about a Turkic population?
I did not talk about Haplogroups here.
Chechens have nothing to do with Turks or speakers of Turkic languages. The Chechen language belongs to the Northeast Caucasian language family, one of the three native language families of the Caucasus (the other two are the Northeast Caucasian languages, which includes Abkhaz and Adyghe, and the Kartvelic languages, which includes the Georgian languages).
With "native", one must also the question "since when"? If we define "native Europeans" as "bearers of Haplogroup I", then it's fairly safe to assume that these languages already became extinct in the Neolithic.
why would that be fairly safe to assume?
you are aware that up to 2500 years ago proto-latin language possibly only "survived" in a village called Rome and few little villages around it?
This thread has been viewed 28202 times.