PDA

View Full Version : Integrating New Evidence for the Origin and Spread of The INDO-European Languages



arvistro
03-10-15, 22:11
Jena Conference on Oct 11th-14th:
http://www.shh.mpg.de/105110/lag_conference
Not sure if they gonna present any new data, but
Look at their speakers!!

Tomenable
04-10-15, 00:00
Thanks for posting! Here is their programme:

http://www.shh.mpg.de/105713/LAG2015_MPISHH_Programme_draft4.pdf

And abstracts:

http://www.shh.mpg.de/105702/Abstractbook_Draft_Oct_2nd.pdf

Angela
04-10-15, 00:06
Yes, all the heavy hitters are going to be there, including three from Reich Lab...Reich himself, Patterson, and Lazaridis. Speaking of Lazaridis, he's going to present the new Anatolia paper, which won't be new then, of course.

This is where are the abstracts can be found:
http://www.shh.mpg.de/105702/Abstractbook_Draft_Oct_2nd.pdf

7441

So, the EEF were only 10% European hunter gatherer. The Near Eastern farmers who went to Europe were 60% G2a. I thought it might have been more. I'm really interested to see the 40% non G2a lineages.

Also, the Reich Lab has analyzed the British samples in Leslie et al, which is great.
"The Genetic History and Structure of Britain"
The recently published paper on the genetic structure of Britain(Leslie et al. Nature
2015) has shown subtle genetic variationcorrelating with geography.Here we reexamine the evidence
in the light of our understanding of the genetics of Ancient Europeand comment on some implications for how
Indo-Europeans spread into Europe.

They're presenting all the opposing viewpoints too, Heggarty, Remco Bouckaert, Jean Paul Demoule etc.



"The East European Steppe in the Discussion about the Expansion of the Indo-European Language

Elke KaiserInstitut für Prähistorische Archäologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin

Eversince the late 19th century archaeologists and linguists, using methods specific
to their fields, have attempted to identify the region in which the proto-Indo-European language was spoken.
However, today there is still no consensus in the many conclusions; several areas and time spans have been put forward as the “Indo-European homeland” and are yet a subject of debate. In the past year several scientific papers were published concerning specific features that could be determined, by using population genetic methods, in the skeletal material that had been excavated and analysed from grave mounds dated to the 1sthalf of the 3\rdmillennium BCE (Yamnaya culture) in the east European steppe area. The same features were then identified in graves of the Corded Ware culture in Central Germany, moreover in surprisingly high amounts. This population genetic shift has now been associated with processes that have been repeatedly postulated with regard to the spread of the proto-Indo-European language: namely, large
population groups migrated from the east European steppe zone into Central Germany, a movement that led to marked demographic as well as cultural changes. Have we come closer to solving the puzzle about the spread of the proto-
Indo-European lan-guage?In order to better judge this issue, we should be aware of the different levels at which the various conclusions have been made. Therefore, in my contribution I will focus on the Yamnaya culture which in general terms is archaeologically described by a specific grave construction and a specific burial custom. Following this I willpresent a few sceptical considerations concerning the possibility of correlating archaeological evidence with the linguistic construct of the proto-Indo-European language."


Some other interesting ones:


From Yamnaya to Bell Beakers: Mechanisms of Transmission in interconnected Europe, 3500–2000 BC-Volekr Heyd

Tomenable
04-10-15, 00:40
From the abstract book, page 10 of 15:

Pre-Indo-European speech carrying a Neolithic signature emanating from the Aegean
Guus Kroonen, Institute for Nordic Studies and Linguistics, Copenhagen University,
Copenhagen

When different Indo-European speaking groups settled Europe, they did not arrive
in terra nullius. Both from the perspective of the Anatolian hypothesis1,2,3 and the
Steppe hypothesis,4,5,6 the carriers of Indo-European speech likely encountered existing
populations that spoke dissimilar, unrelated languages. Relatively little is known
about the Pre-Indo-European linguistic landscape of Europe, as the IndoEuropeanization
of the continent caused a largely unrecorded, massive linguistic
extinction event. However, when the different Indo-European groups entered Europe,
they incorporated lexical material from Europe’s original languages into their
own vocabularies.7 By integrating these “natural samples” of Pre-Indo-European
speech, the original European linguistic and cultural landscape can partly be reconstructed
and matched against the Anatolia and the Steppe hypotheses. My results
reveal that Pre-Indo-European speech contains a clear Neolithic signature emanating
from the Aegean,8 and thus patterns with the prehistoric migration of Europe’s
first farming populations.9,10,11 These results also imply that Indo-European speech
came to Europe following a later migration wave, and therefore favor the Steppe
Hypothesis as a likely scenario for the spread of the Proto-Indo-Europeans.12

Fluffy
04-10-15, 01:45
Looking forward to this.

Finalise
04-10-15, 01:45
"My results reveal that Pre-Indo-European speech contains a clear Neolithic signature emanating from the Aegean,8 and thus patterns with the prehistoric migration of Europe’s first farming populations."How is it possible to prove this in any way?

LeBrok
04-10-15, 03:05
I wish all the speeches were available on YouTube soon.

Brennos
04-10-15, 17:28
So, the EEF were only 10% European hunter gatherer. The Near Eastern farmers who went to Europe were 60% G2a. I thought it might have been more. I'm really interested to see the 40% non G2a lineages


I wonder if it wouldn't be a surprise: 60% G2a and 40% of H2, T1, F*, R-V88 and R-M269?

LeBrok
04-10-15, 17:39
I wonder if it wouldn't be a surprise: 60% G2a and 40% of H2, T1, F*, R-V88 and R-M269?Mostly I2 as a primary WHG marker.

Angela
04-10-15, 17:40
I wonder if it wouldn't be a surprise: 60% G2a and 40% of H2, T1, F*, R-V88 and R-M269?

H2, T1, F*, and R-V88 wouldn't surprise me. I'd be surprised by R-M269. It's very downstream and separated by a lot of years from V88. Is it even old enough?

If it were to be found in a Near Eastern farmer from 6300 BC, that would sure cause a ruckus!

@LeBrok,
That would be the case only if yDNA "I" differentiated from IJ in the Near East instead of Europe, yes? It's certainly possible.

arvistro
04-10-15, 18:53
@LeBrok,
That would be the case only if yDNA "I" differentiated from IJ in the Near East instead of Europe, yes? It's certainly possible.
For I2 that would be most likely already back migration.
I* would be remnants of early split IJ.

Angela
04-10-15, 19:05
For I2 that would be most likely already back migration.
I* would be remnants of early split IJ.

I hadn't thought about I2 being a back migration. Is there any archaeological evidence, though, of a back migration pre Neolithic from Europe to Anatolia?

Angela
04-10-15, 19:07
"My results reveal that Pre-Indo-European speech contains a clear Neolithic signature emanating from the Aegean,8 and thus patterns with the prehistoric migration of Europe’s first farming populations."How is it possible to prove this in any way?

I would think they would be looking at substrate evidence from various language groups in Europe. Perhaps Taranis will chime in if he has time.

Finalise
04-10-15, 19:56
That they can reconstruct some non-IE substratum is possible, but how do they know it's the language of Neolithic farmers, whether Neolithic farmers spoke a homogeneous language, whether Neolithic substrate was mixed with HG substrate, or that it comes specifically from the Aegean. Don't forget Native Americans that are largely homogeneous genetically, on many occasions speak dialects that are impossible to reconstruct into a proto-language with comparative linguistics. Anyhow, I'm sure they have some important information, but given where we are today linguistically their abstract seems to be far reaching. It will be interesting to see if they can find some sort of link between non-IE words in Greek, non-IE words in Germanic, Basque and Etruscan.

arvistro
04-10-15, 22:20
I hadn't thought about I2 being a back migration. Is there any archaeological evidence, though, of a back migration pre Neolithic from Europe to Anatolia?
No idea.
If I earned I2 mutation in Europe, then it has to be back migration. But where it did split is not settled yet, it is only known there was 100% WHG I2 folk, hence my guess it was born in Europe.

LeBrok
05-10-15, 02:10
I would think they would be looking at substrate evidence from various language groups in Europe. Perhaps Taranis will chime in if he has time.
It's possible I2 where squeezed out off Europe during LGM event into Near East.