PDA

View Full Version : R1b Migration (OFFTOPIC about Kurdish language)



Goga
29-12-11, 23:52
I really have to wonder why you keep bringing this up, anyways.Because it has some influences on my own (West Asian / Kurdish) history. Because there was some connection between R1b folks and my own people. That why I'm interested so much in this case.

That's why. I do really want to know what happened in my homeland.

Changes in your history could cause changes in my own history. And I want find the true what really happened in the past.

Taranis
30-12-11, 00:10
Because it has some influences on my own (West Asian / Kurdish) history. Because there was some connection between R1b folks and my own people. That why I'm interested so much in this case.

That's why. I do really want to know what happened in my homeland.

Changes in your history could cause changes in my own history. And I want find the true what really happened in the past.

I really don't think there is any connection with R1b, especially not with R1b-L11. Also, let's look at it from the linguistic perspective: the Kurds speak an Indo-Iranic language, and amongst the modern languages, it is related with Persian, Pashtoo and Ossetian, and more distantly with Indic languages like Hindi, Urdu and Singhalese. Amongst the ancient languages, the Indo-Iranic is represented by Avestan and Sanskrit. Why seek the connection with Western Europe?

Goga
30-12-11, 00:21
I really don't think there is any connection with R1b, especially not with R1b-L11. Also, let's look at it from the linguistic perspective: the Kurds speak an Indo-Iranic language, and amongst the modern languages, it is related with Persian, Pashtoo and Ossetian, and more distantly with Indic languages like Hindi, Urdu and Singhalese. Amongst the ancient languages, the Indo-Iranic is represented by Avestan and Sanskrit. Why seek the connection with Western Europe?Well, according to you European R1b came from Anatolia / West Asia through the Pontic-Caspian steppe. Kurds are the native inhabitants of Kurdistan and they always have been living in Kurdistan (West Asia). For 10000, 20000 years maybe even longer.

Kurdish is a West Iranic language and is also very close related to the Caucasian (Hurrian) languages. Kurdish is from the same area where according to you where R1b lived many thousands years ago!

Actually Kurdish is not a Northwest Iranic language, but Irano-Hurrian language!


Kurds are native to Kurdistan (Anatolia/West Asia), Kurdish language is native to Kurdistan.

What the hell was r1b doing in Kurdistan? Where J2 has always been native to this region! It doesn't fit very well in this picture you see.

That's why I'm interested in this case!

Taranis
30-12-11, 00:46
Well, according to you European R1b came from Anatolia / West Asia through the Pontic-Caspian steppe. Kurds are the native inhabitants of Kurdistan and they always have been living in Kurdistan (West Asia).

How do you define "native" and "always"? Because that can only mean "as long as history mentions them". I don't think Kurds (or "Proto-Kurds", if you will) lived there in the Copper Age, let alone the Neolithic.


Kurdish is a West Iranic language and is also very close related to the Caucasian (Hurrian) languages.

Kurdish is definitely not related with Hurrian. Kurdish is obviously an Indo-European languages, whereas Hurrian is only related with the Urartian languages (together forming the so-called "Hurro-Urartian languages"), and there's no clear relationship with any of the three modern Caucasian language families (Kartvelian, Northeast Caucasian, Northwest Caucasian).


Kurdish is from the same area where according to you where R1b lived many thousands years ago!

No offense, but you're totally overinterpreting things.

Goga
30-12-11, 01:06
How do you define "native" and "always"? Because that can only mean "as long as history mentions them". I don't think Kurds (or "Proto-Kurds", if you will) lived there in the Copper Age, let alone the Neolithic.

Kurdish is definitely not related with Hurrian. Kurdish is obviously an Indo-European languages, whereas Hurrian is only related with the Urartian languages (together forming the so-called "Hurro-Urartian languages"), and there's no clear relationship with any of the three modern Caucasian language families (Kartvelian, Northeast Caucasian, Northwest Caucasian).

No offense, but you're totally overinterpreting things.Lol, you sound like a Turk, an Armenian or Asyrians that denies that Kurds are the native inhabitants of Kurdistan. (I'm sure you're not one of them)

Kurdish IS related to the Hurrian languages. Sure, Kurdish is classified as Northwest Iranian language. But as far as I know Kurdish has Hurrian roots. This explains the ergative construction in Kurdish.

http://www.kurdishacademy.org/sites/default/files/ergativity_construction_in_Kurdish_1979_bynon.pdf


Proto-Kurds like Mushku, Lulubbis, Manneas were all native to Kurdistan and spoke a proto-Kurdish language. Those folks build some of the oldest cities in Kurdistan (and the world).

Genetically Kurds who are West Asian are native to Kurdistan, linguistically there're many connection with the ancient folks of West Asia. Genetically Kurds are also very close to the folks in the Caucasus. If Kurds are not native to Kurdistan than nobody is, lol.

Goga
30-12-11, 01:19
"Today, the city of Mush in northern Kurdistan is named after Mushku; Mount Ararat is the inheritance of Urartu; the Kurdish tribal association of Zubari is named after Subaru. The extraordinary legacy of the Hurrians to the contemporary Kurdish culture is manifested in mythology, religion, martial art and genetics. Religious symbols are ever present in the Kurdish art, while nearly 65 percent of Kurdish names are of Hurrian descent."

http://www.kdp-lebanon.org/kurds.htm

Taranis
30-12-11, 01:21
Lol, you sound like a Turk, an Armenian or Asyrians that denies that Kurds are the native inhabitants of Kurdistan. (I'm sure you're not one of them)

Kurdish IS related to the Hurrian languages. Sure, Kurdish is classified as Northwest Iranian language. But as far as I know Kurdish has Hurrian roots. This explains the ergative construction in Kurdish.

http://www.kurdishacademy.org/sites/default/files/ergativity_construction_in_Kurdish_1979_bynon.pdf

The article mentions no Hurrian loanwords whatsoever. Grammatical structure is not automatically an evidence for a substrate. Ergativity may be a later, independent development in Kurdish.


Proto-Kurds like Lulubbis, Manneas were all native to Kurdistan and spoke a proto-Kurdish language. Those folks build some of the oldest cities in Kurdistan (and the world).


Genetically Kurds who are West Asian are native to Kurdistan, linguistically there're many connection with the ancient folks of West Asia. If Kurds are not native to Kurdistan than nobody is, lol.

There is no reason to assume that the Lullubi mentioned by the Sumerians were Kurds. In fact there is every reason to assume that they were not. Specifically, the "Mitanni" Indo-European loanwords into Hurrian represent a language that was very close to Proto-Indo-Iranic (that is, the differentiation into Iranic and Indic languages had not occured yet). This means that Kurdish as a distinct language must be younger. If the Kurds are indeed "native", then they did only adopt an Indo-European language at a later point.

Goga
30-12-11, 01:34
Are you serious? It depends from which point of view you look at the whole situation.

According to me the proto-Indo-European language is from Kurdistan. That's explains why there're so much Semitic words in it (in PIE).

Saturday, Samstag in German has Semitic roots / are of Semitic origin! The Jews call it Shabbat! In Akkadian it is Shabattu!

According to me Hurrian and PIE language were from the same source and region! Modern Kurdish language IS native to Kurdistan.

Folks on the Indian subcontinent who speak IE languages are actually so called 'ancient Latino's' who got their language from the invaders from West Asia!

Goga
30-12-11, 01:35
There is no reason to assume that the Lullubi mentioned by the Sumerians were Kurds. In fact there is every reason to assume that they were not.
"Frayne (1990) identified their city Lulubuna or Luluban with the modern Kurdish town, Halabja."

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

Taranis
30-12-11, 01:52
Are you serious? It depends from which point of view you look at the whole situation.

According to me the proto-Indo-European language is from Kurdistan. That's explains why there're so much Semitic words in it.

Sorry, that is impossible. If you look into the general area in ancient times. You have Sumerian (a language isolate) and Hurro-Urartian (in itself an unrelated language family), and you have Akkadian (a Semitic language). If PIE was from the same general area and spread from there, there should be loanwords found in all branches of IE. This clearly isn't the case.

The most widely accepted hypothesis about the origin of the Indo-European languages is the Kurgan Hypothesis, which suggests Indo-European originated from the Pontic-Caspian steppe region.


Saturday, Samstag in German has Semitic roots / are of Semitic origin!

I'm sorry to say it, but you have a very naive view on the relationship of languages. The German word "Samstag", and it is derived from the Hebrew word "sabbath" (שבת). Guess what language the Old Testament is originally written in? Hebrew! :shocked:


According to me Hurrian and PIE language were form the same source and region! Modern Kurdish language IS native to Kurdistan.

I'm under the impression you only want to believe that, because there is no evidence for this. I've said before that Kurdish has a common ancestry with other Indo-Iranic languages. If the Indo-European languages were native to the area, we should find Hurrian loanwords for example in Celtic, Germanic or Slavic. This clearly is not the case, and that should tell you something.


"Frayne (1990) identified their city Lulubuna or Luluban with the modern Kurdish town, Halabja."

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

That's about the same as saying Gadir is the modern town of Cadiz. This proves the modern Spanish are Phoenicians!

Goga
30-12-11, 02:02
Sorry, that is impossible. If you look into the general area in ancient times. You have Sumerian (a language isolate) and Hurro-Urartian (in itself an unrelated language family), and you have Akkadian (a Semitic language). If PIE was from the same general area and spread from there, there should be loanwords found in all branches of IE. This clearly isn't the case.

I'm sorry to say it, but you have a very naive view on the relationship of languages. The German word "Samstag", and it is derived from the Hebrew word "sabbath" (שבת). Guess what language the Old Testament is originally written in? Hebrew! :shocked:



I'm under the impression you only want to believe that, because there is no evidence for this. I've said before that Kurdish has a common ancestry with other Indo-Iranic languages. If the Indo-European languages were native to the area, we should find Hurrian loanwords for example in Celtic, Germanic or Slavic. This clearly is not the case, and that should tell you something.



That's about the same as saying Gadir is the modern town of Cadiz. This proves the modern Spanish are Phoenicians!So you basically say that before the Christianity there were no names for days in the weeks in Europe?


A common ancestor of Indo-European and Hurrian from dienekes' site

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/02/common-ancestor-of-indo-european-and.html


The Indo-European Elements in Hurrian

http://www.nostratic.ru/books/(432)bomhard-hurrian.pdf

etc.

Taranis
30-12-11, 02:06
A common ancestor of Indo-European and Hurrian from dienekes' site

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/02/common-ancestor-of-indo-european-and.html

The Indo-European Elements in Hurrian

http://www.nostratic.ru/books/(432)bomhard-hurrian.pdf

etc.

You really have not been reading my earlier posts. I said that there are Indo-European loanwords into Hurrian, which are derived from what appears to be a language close to Proto-Indo-Iranic, not PIE.

Hurrian and Indo-European are fundamentally different from their grammatical structures.

Goga
30-12-11, 02:15
You really have not been reading my earlier posts. I said that there are Indo-European loanwords into Hurrian, which are derived from what appears to be a language close to Proto-Indo-Iranic, not PIE.
So? Is proto-Indo Iranic not Indo-European anymore?

Maybe the so called proto-Indo-Iranic loanwords in the Hurrian languages are not far from the very first Proto-Indo-European language? And that they're not loanwords at all, but native in both groups!

Goga
30-12-11, 02:21
Btw, if R1b is from Anatolia / West Asia wouldn't they be influenced even a little bit by the Hurrians and their language? Or did they totally changed their language in the Pontic-Caspian Steppe???? How can you totally forget your language with genocide, this doesn't make any sense!

Taranis
30-12-11, 02:27
So? Is proto-Indo Iranic not Indo-European anymore?

Maybe the so called proto-Indo-Iranic loanwords in the Hurrian languages are not far from the very first Proto-Indo-European language? And that they're not loanwords at all, but native in both groups!

No offense, but you have no understanding of how linguistics works, because otherwise you would not make such statements. The Indo-Iranic languages differentiated are in so far from PIE as that they are Satem languages. Just like Albanian, Armenian and Balto-Slavic. In addition, the Indo-Iranic languages have unique sound laws found there not found in the other languages. The loanwords in Hurrian clearly do NOT reflect the PIE state. To give an example:

Hurrian "aššuššanne" ("horse trainer") vs. Sanskrit "asvah" (horse)

If you compare this with Old Irish "ech", Latin "equus" and Greek "hippo" (which all derive from PIE *ek´wos) it's clear that the Hurrian loanword is not from common PIE but from an Indo-Iranic language.

Goga
30-12-11, 02:46
No offense, but you have no understanding of how linguistics works, because otherwise you would not make such statements. The Indo-Iranic languages differentiated are in so far from PIE as that they are Satem languages. Just like Albanian, Armenian and Balto-Slavic. In addition, the Indo-Iranic languages have unique sound laws found there not found in the other languages. The loanwords in Hurrian clearly do NOT reflect the PIE state. To give an example:

Hurrian "aššuššanne" ("horse trainer") vs. Sanskrit "asvah" (horse)

If you compare this with Old Irish "ech", Latin "equus" and Greek "hippo" (which all derive from PIE *ek´wos) it's clear that the Hurrian loanword is not from common PIE but from an Indo-Iranic language.Very interesting post, thanks! But it's wrong.

As far as I know the language of the Hittites was not Indo-Iranic and they called the horse 'asuva' too.

According to me 'asuva' was more a West Asian name for the horse than 'Indo-Iranian'.

Taranis
30-12-11, 02:54
As far as I know the language of the Hittites was not Indo-Iranic and they called the horse 'asuva' too.

As far I know that's Luwian, not Hittite. But, I admit that the situation in Anatolian is unclear because it has been speculated that the word may be a loanword into Anatolian from Indo-Iranic. But that doesn't really matter in this discussion because the Hurrian word is clearly not from PIE, and cognates of the word are found in most branches of IE.

Goga
30-12-11, 03:22
Ok we don't agree with each other about the 'urheimat' of PIE, but we're far of topic now.

The answer to your initial question why I'm interested in R1b so much is because I do consider myself, as a Kurd (Irano-Hurrian), native to my homeland Kurdistan. I'm not from the Pontic-Caspian steppe nor from the Central Asia nor from Europe.

According to you and Maciamo R1b is from the same region as Kurdistan. There's a lot R1b among Kurdish neighbours the Assyrians and Armenians, more than in (South)east Europe or even in Austrians for instance.

If R1b is from West Asia that would mean that the Hurrians influenced R1b folks who later migrated into Europe! If R1b is from Europe this would mean that R1b folks brought some European influences with them to the homeland of ancient the Hurrians (who according to me make part of the Kurdish race)!

That's why I'm saying that changes in R1b folks history could affect the history of the region where I'm from, thus my own history. For me it's very important because we're also involving here the region where I'm from. So this is the answer to your question why I want to know the truth!


Btw, I do consider Hurrians and proto-(Indo-)Iranics as the same people and from Kurdistan! But on this point we don't agree with each other!

Yetos
30-12-11, 08:20
Are you serious? It depends from which point of view you look at the whole situation.

According to me the proto-Indo-European language is from Kurdistan. That's explains why there're so much Semitic words in it (in PIE).

Saturday, Samstag in German has Semitic roots / are of Semitic origin! The Jews call it Shabbat! In Akkadian it is Shabattu!

According to me Hurrian and PIE language were from the same source and region! Modern Kurdish language IS native to Kurdistan.

Folks on the Indian subcontinent who speak IE languages are actually so called 'ancient Latino's' who got their language from the invaders from West Asia!


Saturday from Saturn

Yetos
30-12-11, 08:34
"Frayne (1990) identified their city Lulubuna or Luluban with the modern Kurdish town, Halabja."

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


consider the Greco -Aryan, The Aryan that Moved to Greece, The Greeks,

Lelekes /k/ maybe a w that in other IE might be /v/ so it might be to another IE as Lelev-es

The problem of IE in minor asia is
1)was Hetit a clear IE or they learn it from elsewhere?
2)were and where IE before Hettit in minor Asia and middle East?
3) R1a was native to minor Asia or was a later entrance (Indo-Iranian, Scythian etc)

The J2 for me is a clear explanation of IE south corridor, Celts-Greek - Aryan- Avestan-Armenian-Iranian-Indo etc
but does not help us in North of Caucasus areas, german-Slavic

Hettit language was no satem no Centum, means much older in sounds than Indo-Iranian,
Hettit language was primitive and poor that had no genders, in fact that creates a problem
Did Hettits bring North IE to minor Asia where took older forms? (tenses cases genders)?
or Hettits learn IE in minor Asia, S/W Caucas, Pontic-Laz Area(Colchis)?

consider that N East Europe toponymes end like Hettit toponymes,
-wa(ta) Warsowa Moscowa etc

Kurds Do not Belong to Indo-Iranian Linguistic no matter you like it you want or ask it,
Kurds and Greeks are from same ancient recipe the Aryan you want or not,

the differences is that Greeks drop under Roman -Celtic-Thracian influence and Christianity,
while Kurds drop to Turkish Arabic Semitic Indo-Iranian Islam influence,
consider that the word Kuretes, Surds-Surdi, has meaning in Greeks, and exists much before Homer,

Just leave outside the politics and check the Unique forms of Past tences cases etc the Greek grammar of ancient Greek and Aryan, then you realize that all you say are modern but not well based, while the Grammar speaks of it shelf.
the Indo is much after, consider that in Areas where Alexander passed the Linguistic Remnants Speak of Indo-Aryan Greco-Aryan, nowhere Indo-Iranian, no where Greco-Iranian why?
shearch little more, then you will realise the Mittani language,
[Mitani = Mo+tu+wa Mi-Tuva (LieTuva, Lat(u)via land of Mo people (Homo) Mycenae= Mo+ko+no Mo+ssa+no city of Mo people, also Myssi-wa Myssia, Moessia, Moschoi, etc, Mo people leave to go west]

If that is true, Then surely R1b L40 was minor Asian that moved west to Europe, as IE language carrier (although I believe and many other R1b are from Caucas and minor Asia that brought IE to Europe, But I can not certify if were origianl IE speakers or learn IE from minor Asia)

the same problem is also with R1a M-17 M198 which although explain very well IE as Slavic and Germanic and Hellenic and etc, does not Help with Caucas Balkars who are Turkic,
so if R1b problem is Basquez, the R1a problem is Turkic and the J2 problem is that leaves outside all North IE speakers (Slavs-Germans etc)

Taranis
30-12-11, 13:17
Ok we don't agree with each other about the 'urheimat' of PIE, but we're far of topic now.

The answer to your initial question why I'm interested in R1b so much is because I do consider myself, as a Kurd (Irano-Hurrian), native to my homeland Kurdistan. I'm not from the Pontic-Caspian steppe nor from the Central Asia nor from Europe.

According to you and Maciamo R1b is from the same region as Kurdistan. There's a lot R1b among Kurdish neighbours the Assyrians and Armenians, more than in (South)east Europe or even in Austrians for instance.

If R1b is from West Asia that would mean that the Hurrians influenced R1b folks who later migrated into Europe! If R1b is from Europe this would mean that R1b folks brought some European influences with them to the homeland of ancient the Hurrians (who according to me make part of the Kurdish race)!

That's why I'm saying that changes in R1b folks history could affect the history of the region where I'm from, thus my own history. For me it's very important because we're also involving here the region where I'm from. So this is the answer to your question why I want to know the truth!


Btw, I do consider Hurrians and proto-(Indo-)Iranics as the same people and from Kurdistan! But on this point we don't agree with each other!

I really do not wish to sound offensive in the slightest, but what does it tell about you that you believe in to your own point of view regardless of all facts around them. You have your own pre-fabricated opinion, and everything you see must fit into that fabric. That is not science. That's dogma.

Taranis
30-12-11, 15:21
Kurds Do not Belong to Indo-Iranian Linguistic no matter you like it you want or ask it,
Kurds and Greeks are from same ancient recipe the Aryan you want or not

Kurdish is an Iranic language, which are in turn a branch of the Indo-Iranic languages. There is no doubt about that.

What does "Aryan" mean, anyways? It's usage is somewhat ambiguous, which is why many linguists have abandoned the term, but it usually either refers to Indic, Iranic, or Indo-Iranic languages.

Greek in turn is definitely not an Indo-Iranic language. We also know that from about the same time as the Indo-Iranic loanwords in Hurrian are recorded, we already have Greek as a separate language attested in Linear B.

Yetos
30-12-11, 17:02
Kurdish is an Iranic language, which are in turn a branch of the Indo-Iranic languages. There is no doubt about that.

What does "Aryan" mean, anyways? It's usage is somewhat ambiguous, which is why many linguists have abandoned the term, but it usually either refers to Indic, Iranic, or Indo-Iranic languages.

Greek in turn is definitely not an Indo-Iranic language. We also know that from about the same time as the Indo-Iranic loanwords in Hurrian are recorded, we already have Greek as a separate language attested in Linear B.

That is the Point,

Just search Kalasha (Kalash language)
Not Indo-Iranian But Indo -Aryan,

Mycenean is proto-pre Greek substractum,
in Mycenean times Greeks (γραικοι of Hommer existed exactly where R1a in Greece is today)
the Aryan you say that is Deserted, it a grammar formation that connects area from Greece to Zagreus mountains and Caucas,

the one you say Greek as an alone Language is true, cause it is area of many pass, and transformation,

consider that Driopes a minor Asian IE tribe, (Druids) passed from minor Asia to Greece and move lost West, where? ask the Druids. (R1b? J2b?)

the ancient Greek the older Kurdish and many other Anatolian Languages (incuding Armenian as seperated in that Family) share same Grammar forms, unique in IE.
the differences of later exelixis, by occupation, influence, mix etc is another story,

Goga
30-12-11, 21:48
consider the Greco -Aryan, The Aryan that Moved to Greece, The Greeks,

Lelekes /k/ maybe a w that in other IE might be /v/ so it might be to another IE as Lelev-es

The problem of IE in minor asia is
1)was Hetit a clear IE or they learn it from elsewhere?
2)were and where IE before Hettit in minor Asia and middle East?
3) R1a was native to minor Asia or was a later entrance (Indo-Iranian, Scythian etc)

The J2 for me is a clear explanation of IE south corridor, Celts-Greek - Aryan- Avestan-Armenian-Iranian-Indo etc
but does not help us in North of Caucasus areas, german-Slavic

Hettit language was no satem no Centum, means much older in sounds than Indo-Iranian,
Hettit language was primitive and poor that had no genders, in fact that creates a problem
Did Hettits bring North IE to minor Asia where took older forms? (tenses cases genders)?
or Hettits learn IE in minor Asia, S/W Caucas, Pontic-Laz Area(Colchis)?

consider that N East Europe toponymes end like Hettit toponymes,
-wa(ta) Warsowa Moscowa etc

Kurds Do not Belong to Indo-Iranian Linguistic no matter you like it you want or ask it,
Kurds and Greeks are from same ancient recipe the Aryan you want or not,

the differences is that Greeks drop under Roman -Celtic-Thracian influence and Christianity,
while Kurds drop to Turkish Arabic Semitic Indo-Iranian Islam influence,
consider that the word Kuretes, Surds-Surdi, has meaning in Greeks, and exists much before Homer,

Just leave outside the politics and check the Unique forms of Past tences cases etc the Greek grammar of ancient Greek and Aryan, then you realize that all you say are modern but not well based, while the Grammar speaks of it shelf.
the Indo is much after, consider that in Areas where Alexander passed the Linguistic Remnants Speak of Indo-Aryan Greco-Aryan, nowhere Indo-Iranian, no where Greco-Iranian why?
shearch little more, then you will realise the Mittani language,
[Mitani = Mo+tu+wa Mi-Tuva (LieTuva, Lat(u)via land of Mo people (Homo) Mycenae= Mo+ko+no Mo+ssa+no city of Mo people, also Myssi-wa Myssia, Moessia, Moschoi, etc, Mo people leave to go west]

If that is true, Then surely R1b L40 was minor Asian that moved west to Europe, as IE language carrier (although I believe and many other R1b are from Caucas and minor Asia that brought IE to Europe, But I can not certify if were origianl IE speakers or learn IE from minor Asia)

the same problem is also with R1a M-17 M198 which although explain very well IE as Slavic and Germanic and Hellenic and etc, does not Help with Caucas Balkars who are Turkic,
so if R1b problem is Basquez, the R1a problem is Turkic and the J2 problem is that leaves outside all North IE speakers (Slavs-Germans etc)
You're way off topic but I will give properly what I think about points you discuss about, because you took some time to write this down.

First of all, I'm not sure if that what I say is the absolute true. I'm just giving my view of point as a West Asian-centric fella. But I truly believe in in this concept for a couple of years now!

As far as I know the Hittites were the newcomers in West Asia. Before them the proto Kurdish languages (call it proto-Indo-Iranian, call it proto-Iranic (Aryan), I call it Irano-Hurrian) were already spoken in Kurdistan. Proto-Kurds like Mitanni (northwest) & Kassites (southeast) in the east already formed a counterbalance of power in West Asia. Those Mitanni & Kassites were according to me in the majority J2 & G2 and in the minority R1a folks.

There's a lot J2 and other West Asian DNA in Central Asia. It mixed with the natives and steppe folks from above the Caspian Sea.

According to me Irano-Hurrians (other call them proto-Indo-Iranians) who lived a semi-nomadic way of life moved to the Central Asia and took the Irano-Hurrian language with them. Central Asians mixed with the newcomers from Kurdistan and became known as the East-Iranic peoples.

Later these East-Iranic tribes (with a lot J2a but also R1a & R2a) went to the west again, but now also to the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. They became known as Scythians, Parthians etc. Later there was also a back migration of these East-Iranic peoples from the Steppes into Kurdistan.

And yes, like you, I truly believe that the first proto-Indo-Iranians, proto-Iranics (Aryans) or Irano-Hurrians were mostly the J2a & G2 folks from West Asia!

Goga
30-12-11, 22:02
What does "Aryan" mean, anyways? It's usage is somewhat ambiguous, which is why many linguists have abandoned the term, but it usually either refers to Indic, Iranic, or Indo-Iranic languages.Hindi is not an 'Aryan' language, but INDO-Aryan

Taranis
30-12-11, 22:09
As far as I know the Hittites were the newcomers in West Asia. Before them the proto Kurdish languages (call it proto-Indo-Iranian, call it proto-Iranic (Aryan), I call it Irano-Hurrian) were already spoken in Kurdistan. Proto-Kurds like Mitanni (northwest) & Kassites (southeast) in the east already formed a counterbalance of power in West Asia. Those Mitanni & Kassites were according to me in the majority J2 & G2 and in the minority R1a folks.

Sorry, but this is simply wrong, and you are just making this up. The earliest known Hittite texts - which are indeed the oldest recorded Indo-European texts anywhere, are from the 17th century BC, and the Indo-Iranic (Mitanni) loanwords in Hurrian are only from the 14th century BC. The earliest references to the Hurrians or their language is from the 23rd century BC. The Kassites were a non-Indo-European people.

Goga
30-12-11, 22:11
Sorry, but this is simply wrong, and you are just making this up. The earliest known Hittite texts - which are indeed the oldest recorded Indo-European texts anywhere, are from the 17th century BC, and the Indo-Iranic (Mitanni) loanwords in Hurrian are only from the 14th century BC. The earliest references to the Hurrians or their language is from the 23rd century BC. The Kassites were a non-Indo-European people.Yes the oldest RECORDED IE texts. But who is saying that it was the oldest SPOKEN IE language in West Asia?

Some say that Kassites were related to the Hurrians, other say that the Kassites were proto-Indo-Iranic (Irano-Hurrian) folks! The personal names of the Kassites sound even very 'Iranic'!

Btw, Kassites called their homeland Karduniash, sounds very familiar to Kurdistan. -Niash- was the Kassites suffix for -land-, like -stan-!

Taranis
30-12-11, 22:21
Yes the oldest RECORDED IE texts. But who is saying that it was the oldest spoken IE language in West Asia???

Well, what does that make of you when you believe into something contrary to every evidence that exists, and contrary to everything we know about the evolution of the Indo-European languages. You chose to completely ignore every evidence that exists because you have your own pre-fabricated opinion which you are not going to change anyways. That is not scientific at all, that's dogmatism.

Goga
30-12-11, 22:27
Well, what does that make of you when you believe into something contrary to every evidence that exists, and contrary to everything we know about the evolution of the Indo-European languages. You chose to completely ignore every evidence that exists because you have your own pre-fabricated opinion which you are not going to change anyways. That is not scientific at all, that's dogmatism.Nothing is 'fixed' yet. Well the whole Indo-European language theory is very old dated and doesn’t make any sense! We all know that IE speakers are genetically not the same. Indo-European race doesn't exist!

So some groups must have adapted IE languages from other groups if there're no mistakes in the Indo-European language family tree at the first place...

Taranis
30-12-11, 22:31
Nothing is 'fixed' yet. Well the whole Indo-European language theory is very old dated and doesn’t make any sense!

Now you say that the Indo-European languages don't make any sense. 150+ years of research and of accumulated knowledge, and it doesn't make sense, because it does not fit into your own dogmas about the Kurdish language. I'm running out of patience with you, and you can consider yourself warned.

Yetos
30-12-11, 22:59
You're way off topic but I will give properly what I think about points you discuss about, because you took some time to write this down.

First of all, I'm not sure if that what I say is the absolute true. I'm just giving my view of point as a West Asian-centric fella. But I truly believe in in this concept for a couple of years now!

As far as I know the Hittites were the newcomers in West Asia. Before them the proto Kurdish languages (call it proto-Indo-Iranian, call it proto-Iranic (Aryan), I call it Irano-Hurrian) were already spoken in Kurdistan. Proto-Kurds like Mitanni (northwest) & Kassites (southeast) in the east already formed a counterbalance of power in West Asia. Those Mitanni & Kassites were according to me in the majority J2 & G2 and in the minority R1a folks.

There's a lot J2 and other West Asian DNA in Central Asia. It mixed with the natives and steppe folks from above the Caspian Sea.

According to me Irano-Hurrians (other call them proto-Indo-Iranians) who lived a semi-nomadic way of life moved to the Central Asia and took the Irano-Hurrian language with them. Central Asians mixed with the newcomers from Kurdistan and became known as the East-Iranic peoples.

Later these East-Iranic tribes (with a lot J2a but also R1a & R2a) went to the west again, but now also to the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. They became known as Scythians, Parthians etc. Later there was also a back migration of these East-Iranic peoples from the Steppes into Kurdistan.

And yes, like you, I truly believe that the first proto-Indo-Iranians, proto-Iranics (Aryans) or Irano-Hurrians were mostly the J2a & G2 folks from West Asia!


That is a possible theory,
that find agree in some Circles in Greece, IE as J2 language and from them to R1a of Siberia and r1b of Europe,
I just mention it as a possible theory,
All 3 theories, as you read in my post have a missing link,
if J2 is Ie that means is clear a minor Asian, Aegean, Pontic, Language but much before Chalkolithic era probably far to early neolitic or even paleolithic eras,

The think you do not understand or know is that Greco-Aryan was not Satem (Iranian) neither Centum (Greek) but the spliting era language,
after the Indo - (proto-Zoroasters) enter we have
Indo-Iranian (Satemization),

according that Theory (J2) the IE were minor Asians that spread to west (pre-myceneans, pre-Celtic) and East (Scyhtians, India)
From India we have devastations to Iran that makes Satemization of Language to Indo-Iranian while Scythian moved North of Black Sea to Europe creating Germans and Slavic,
That Thoery lacks in Gennetic that J2 should leave tracks behind it if was connected with R1a of Scythians, But we find only Trucks of R1a

the other Theory of R1b lacks in case of Basquez,
while the R1a lacks in case of Caucasos Balkars,

so a clear primary HG of IE is not certain,
that brings back to the begin,

So where was PIE spoken, and where was primary land,
that gives 2 areas,
1) The south Black Sea mountains of Pontus, The Colchis (Lazistan) and Georgia,
we know that Hettits enter from Georgia to Lazistan to North Minor Asia (Pontus) etc,
2) is the Samara open fields of Scythian R1a horse riders (N east Caucas)

An alternative solution that Lacks of Evidence is the Ugarit case, but until now only few support it, the case of Yehunda work,

other non proven or proposed theories that are created mainly for Nationalistic or pride reason are

IE is nothing more than an Indian language that spread North and West, (PIE starts from India)
IE is a Greek Language that change according the tribes that assimilated (PIE = Proto Greek)
IE is nothing more than a Slavic-Scythian language (PanSlavism)
IE is a German-Iranian Language (well known circles theory)

All the above are fabricated cases that contain only a small % of truth


now about the R1b
the R1b L-40 that exists in Greece is considered Hettit meaning that indeed Hettits moved West,


well in another post I said something,
Sar-Deis
Sur-di (Ancient Makedonia even today the prefix exist)
Kuretes etc
All seems to be to have a connection,
i have told you that Colchis was Land of Medea (Argonauts), which later we read in Text moved to minor Asia from Greece to Find the Aryans who spoke Colchian !!!!

if you realize that, then we might have a good Starting point,

Yetos
30-12-11, 23:45
Now you say that the Indo-European languages don't make any sense. 150+ years of research and of accumulated knowledge, and it doesn't make sense, because it does not fit into your own dogmas about the Kurdish language. I'm running out of patience with you, and you can consider yourself warned.

Taranis that is true, many laws that can work in other languages does not work in LPIE languages as Greek

just consider how in Grim's laws the Greek Argonauts au=af how the u->f and in evangelion ευ = ev u ->V
you are supporting the case of B and D in Ancient Greek while in compare with Latin the non- loan words are with V,
well search the laws of Kallasha were w (F diggama) goes to ph the one you insist that exist in ancient Greek
were the /k/ goes /x/ and /d/ is /δ/
just listen to Kalash when they say Μαχεδον Machedon (Makedon)
how the FESTIA goes to Jestia Ζεστια and Greek διδω (give) goes δito (no d)
how can Grim's Law explain that?
that is why I believe that we need more search to explain older forms,

Goga
31-12-11, 00:06
I'm running out of patience with you, and you can consider yourself warned.Why? Because we don’t agree with each other?

Graeco-Armeno-Aryan hypothesis disrupt everything what you know about Centum-Satem theory!

Taranis
31-12-11, 00:11
Why? Because we don’t agree with each other?

No. I've described why.


Graeco-Armeno-Aryan hypothesis disrupt everything what you know about Centum-Satem theory!

Well I really don't agree with Yetos: most importantly, I think that Mycenean Greek is indeed the ancestor language of Homeric/Classical Greek, and it was spoken around the same time (14th century BC) as the Mitanni Indo-Iranic loanwords show up in Hurrian. This means Greek was already a separate language at that time, and Centum/Satem languages were already separated.

Goga
31-12-11, 00:12
The think you do not understand or know is that Greco-Aryan was not Satem (Iranian) neither Centum (Greek) but the spliting era language,
after the Indo - (proto-Zoroasters) enter we have
Indo-Iranian (Satemization),

according that Theory (J2) the IE were minor Asians that spread to west (pre-myceneans, pre-Celtic) and East (Scyhtians, India)
From India we have devastations to Iran that makes Satemization of Language to Indo-Iranian while Scythian moved North of Black Sea to Europe creating Germans and Slavic,
That Thoery lacks in Gennetic that J2 should leave tracks behind it if was connected with R1a of Scythians, But we find only Trucks of R1a
Interesting theory, give me some time to think about it!

Btw, there is no 'indo'-DNA in Kurds. Most Kurds have Caucasian (West Asian) and Gedrosian (hybrid between West Asian & Central Asian) DNA-component. Gedrosian component is from the East-Iranic folks, while Caucasian component is from the original Irano-Hurrian (West Iranic) folks! East Iranic folks are a hybrid between native Central Asians and Irano-Hurrians.

East Iranic folks mixed with local population in Central Asia and the Pontic Caspian steppe and lost much of hg. J2a and gained much of R1a! There's very much J2 in Central Asia, like Afghanistan, Tajikistan etc.

Goga
31-12-11, 00:13
Well I really don't agree with Yetos: most importantly, I think that Mycenean Greek is indeed the ancestor language of Homeric/Classical Greek, and it was spoken around the same time (14th century BC) as the Mitanni Indo-Iranic loanwords show up in Hurrian. This means Greek was already a separate language at that time, and Centum/Satem languages were already separated.A lot people take this theory very serious!

Btw, I don't agree and I don't disagree. I just don't know much about it. And I have my own 'theory'...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeco-Aryan