Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Separation between Scandinavian and other Germanic languages

  1. #1
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    spongetaro's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-01-11
    Posts
    706
    Points
    29,390
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,390, Level: 52
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 360
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: France



    Separation between Scandinavian and other Germanic languages



    When did the separation between Scandinavian and other Germanic languages occur?
    Has a common Germanic language ever been spoken in Scandinavia (or pre-proto Germanic since it lacked the Grimm's law) ? And which branch of the germanic language during the migration era was closer to the Proto Germanic?

    As west Germanic languages were spoken in the area of the Jastorf culture, I tend to think that those languages remained close to the original Proto German (if it ever existed). It the same time pre Germanic languages could have arisen as early as the Nordic bronze age in the Jutland. So maybe old Norse languages kept some features of this bronze age pre Germanic language.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    ebAmerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-07-12
    Posts
    226
    Points
    6,051
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,051, Level: 23
    Level completed: 1%, Points required for next Level: 499
    Overall activity: 2.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b- P312
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2E2

    Ethnic group
    German and Swedish
    Country: USA - Colorado



    http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/lin...of_English.htm

    This will give you a good idea of Germanic, even though it's about the origin of English.

  3. #3
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    spongetaro's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-01-11
    Posts
    706
    Points
    29,390
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,390, Level: 52
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 360
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by ebAmerican View Post
    http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/lin...of_English.htm

    This will give you a good idea of Germanic, even though it's about the origin of English.
    Thank you. I'm impressed by the amount of aboriginal (non IE) words in the proto German vocabulary , probably borrowed from the Funell beaker folks

  4. #4
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by spongetaro View Post
    When did the separation between Scandinavian and other Germanic languages occur?
    Has a common Germanic language ever been spoken in Scandinavia (or pre-proto Germanic since it lacked the Grimm's law) ? And which branch of the germanic language during the migration era was closer to the Proto Germanic?

    As west Germanic languages were spoken in the area of the Jastorf culture, I tend to think that those languages remained close to the original Proto German (if it ever existed). It the same time pre Germanic languages could have arisen as early as the Nordic bronze age in the Jutland. So maybe old Norse languages kept some features of this bronze age pre Germanic language.
    In my opinion, it's very hard to estimate when the separation did occur: it must have been some time during latest antiquity / the dark ages, but things are a bit blurred because it's likely that Old Norse kept a limited degree of mutual intelligibility with the West Germanic languages. In terms of sound laws, the Scandinavian languages share a number of early innovations with West Germanic, including the rhotacism (the development *z > *r, for example English "was" vs. "were"), as well as the process of umlaut. The East Germanic languages (Gothic) lacked these developments. Furthermore, unlike the Continental West Germanic languages (but just like Anglo-Saxon), the Scandinavian languages were entirely unaffected by the Second Germanic Sound Shift (aka High German Consonant shift).

    On the question wether Pre-Proto-Germanic (ie, Proto-Germanic before the First Germanic Sound Shift) was spoken in Scandinavia, it's hard to assess. If the people of the Nordic Bronze Age spoke Pre-Proto-Germanic, then the answer has to be obviously yes.

  5. #5
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,536
    Points
    45,288
    Level
    65
    Points: 45,288, Level: 65
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 262
    Overall activity: 16.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by spongetaro View Post
    Thank you. I'm impressed by the amount of aboriginal (non IE) words in the proto German vocabulary , probably borrowed from the Funell beaker folks
    "aborigene"??? maybe for the most: but be carefull: some I-E synonyms can gave been lost as time passed in the majorrity of the families: one word found in only a language of a big family doesn't signify it is a loan word of substratic origin, not always -
    in this example I saw the "aborigene" Word "land": but land is upon celtic from *plan- surely I-Ean...
    a lot of words disappear with time and not all of them are found in ancient languages (because our knowledge of ALL ancient I-E
    languages is unleven;

  6. #6
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    spongetaro's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-01-11
    Posts
    706
    Points
    29,390
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,390, Level: 52
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 360
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post

    On the question wether Pre-Proto-Germanic (ie, Proto-Germanic before the First Germanic Sound Shift) was spoken in Scandinavia, it's hard to assess. If the people of the Nordic Bronze Age spoke Pre-Proto-Germanic, then the answer has to be obviously yes.
    In German wikipedia, is written that a form Pre German (before the First sound shift) was spoken as south as the Unetice culture.

    die Träger der Aunjetitzer Kultur (genauer: deren nördliche Teilgruppe) eine frühe Form des Prägermanischen gesprochen haben
    So it makes a Nordic origin of the Germanic languages unlikely. I first thought that the amount of non IE words in proto-Germanic was due to the influence of the aboriginal Funell Beaker culture on the Corded invaders. Another source for the non IE words could be the late cucuteni Trypolje culture at the time of the contact with the steppic Usatovo culture ( see the horse the wheel and language). But if the borrowings from a non IE source happened as early as the fourth millenium BC, we would see the same non IE words (Kings, wife, pigs etc) in all western IE laguages.

    My proposed scenario now is that the speakers of Pre-Germanic came from central Europe at the time of Unetice with a "pure" IE language and that the non IE vocabulary in Proto German is due to later contacts with the Nordic bronze age.

  7. #7
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,536
    Points
    45,288
    Level
    65
    Points: 45,288, Level: 65
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 262
    Overall activity: 16.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    I agree for the most:
    the atlantic megalithic [Y-R1b6L21?] and the scandinavian "autochtonous" elements [Y-I1? + some Y-R1b-U106???] linking Scandinavia to North-Sea-South Baltic area have almost surely been I-Eized by a southern coming element: the bronze cultures of Thuringen (Saale) of "Corded" inspiration [Y-R1A?] was surely yet I-E speaking and this element and its geographic position could very well explain the links between proto-germanic and proto-'satem' languages, supposed to be tied latter than the links with proto-italic but earlier than the links with proto-celtic or celtic - but a more southern impulsion of a kind of proto-celto-italic group (Bell-beakers boosted?) arrived there from Bavaria and Austria, can be supposed too: [Y-R1b-U152? mixed with Y-R1B-U106?): a synthesis in Thuringen between Southern I-Es (BB derived) and Eastern I-Es ("corded") I-E passing their language to northern non-I-E people, the true nordic (not the megalithics) leading to the consonnantic germanic first mutation? undividualizing like that the germanic family among I-Es???
    I keep on in the generalities because what we have does not seam to me authorising more detailed conclusions, as archeological cultures are not always tied to tightly to types of language

  8. #8
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    27-06-11
    Posts
    29
    Points
    2,634
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,634, Level: 14
    Level completed: 62%, Points required for next Level: 116
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Finland



    1 members found this post helpful.
    There are Northwest Indo-European/Pre-Germanic, Palaeo-Germanic, Early Proto-Germanic, Late Proto-Germanic and Northwest Germanic loanwords in Finnic and Saami. And yet we have only few late loanwords between Germanic and Balto-Slavic. (See Google books: Nordic languages, Chapter 67 by Koivulehto)

    Conclusion: Germanic development could not have occurred anywhere near the Southeast corner of Baltic Sea, but it must have occurred in Scandinavia. Only at some later stage Germanic spread to the area of Jastorf culture. Jastorf area cannot explain (1) the lack of Germanic–Balto-Slavic contacts, and (2) Germanic–Finnic/Saami contacts.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran10000 Experience Points
    zanipolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    22-03-11
    Posts
    2,073
    Points
    22,792
    Level
    46
    Points: 22,792, Level: 46
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 758
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - Z19945
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1a4o

    Ethnic group
    Down Under
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by Jaska View Post
    There are Northwest Indo-European/Pre-Germanic, Palaeo-Germanic, Early Proto-Germanic, Late Proto-Germanic and Northwest Germanic loanwords in Finnic and Saami. And yet we have only few late loanwords between Germanic and Balto-Slavic. (See Google books: Nordic languages, Chapter 67 by Koivulehto)

    Conclusion: Germanic development could not have occurred anywhere near the Southeast corner of Baltic Sea, but it must have occurred in Scandinavia. Only at some later stage Germanic spread to the area of Jastorf culture. Jastorf area cannot explain (1) the lack of Germanic–Balto-Slavic contacts, and (2) Germanic–Finnic/Saami contacts.
    thats interesting, so do you rule out germanic starting in jutland and holstein areas as well as scandinavian areas.?

    I recently read many new revelations and archeological findings that the goths originated in Hinterpommeria and east of that, basically between the oder river and nogat river ( east of the vistula river), that being so, it also leaves the mecklenburg area as germanic and also gives more fact that the goths migrated into sweden from pommeria filling the void of the "germanics" who moved south towards bavaria.

    One issue is how and when did the east-germanic tribes come from
    Father's Mtdna H95a1
    Grandfather Mtdna T2b24
    Great Grandfather Mtdna T1a1e
    GMother paternal side YDna R1b-S8172
    Mother's YDna R1a-Z282

  10. #10
    Nobody's perfect Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    Ha-Nasr's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-09-12
    Posts
    18
    Points
    1,854
    Level
    12
    Points: 1,854, Level: 12
    Level completed: 2%, Points required for next Level: 296
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Probably E-M81

    Ethnic group
    Saharan
    Country: Morocco



    Is there any genetic difference between goths and west Germans?

  11. #11
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,536
    Points
    45,288
    Level
    65
    Points: 45,288, Level: 65
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 262
    Overall activity: 16.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by zanipolo View Post
    thats interesting, so do you rule out germanic starting in jutland and holstein areas as well as scandinavian areas.?

    I recently read many new revelations and archeological findings that the goths originated in Hinterpommeria and east of that, basically between the oder river and nogat river ( east of the vistula river), that being so, it also leaves the mecklenburg area as germanic and also gives more fact that the goths migrated into sweden from pommeria filling the void of the "germanics" who moved south towards bavaria.

    One issue is how and when did the east-germanic tribes come from
    at the contrary I suppose Jaska was supporting the thesis or a scandinavian birth for full germanic development -
    for I think, the presence of a lot of germanic recent loan words in finnic doesn't prove germanic formed in Scandinavia -
    the lack of baltic loan words in finnic doesn't prove much more -
    for I red and believe knowing the contacts between proto-germanic and proto-baltic-slavic languages is proven, and dated from between 2000 to 1000 BC apporximatively (between separation of celtic and italic and celtic loan words in germanic)- I red also that some proto-satem-I-E and some proto-basque was supposed having been spoken in Scandinvia before germanic, according to a survey about substratum words in Saami finnic -(for proto-satem I can imagine some first bands of 'corded' Y-R1a... - ) - the two can make sense -
    about Y-I1-M253 I have in mind a digest of a survey by Aleksander Shtrunov considering that the Y-I1 found today in Volga-Oka regions in central-northern Russia have an origin there older than the late germanic movements in Eastern Europe - He considers that this HG was the predominent one among the previous members of maglemosian Arensberg Culture (Denmark and around) and the Swiderian Culture (E-Germany-Poland-Baltic-Bela-Russia), of 'cromagnon type' (dolichocranic-euryprosopic of high stature), that spred around from 10000/9000 BC (to East, Volga etc...) and 3000 BC (to North and N-West, to Baltic shores and Finnland) - He wrote that the saami-finnic substratum had pre-finnic terms of unknown origin, in contradiction with the survey I mentionned above...
    SO? THE PROBLEM STAYS
    Y-I1 bearers passed surely into Scandinavia before I-E speaking a language that is still to be found -
    some Y-I1 bearers surely stayed South of the Baltic and was incorporated in the proto- OR fully germanic tribes, O hope around Denmark -
    the presence of early Y-R1a in Norway and Western Sweden before a full centum I-E language speaking population seams sensible when we look at its distribution in Scandinavia, where a second wave of Y-I1 seams evident too. (I'll try to see if I can make something of the Y-I1 STRs there), surely at same time than a Y-R1b-U106 one -
    now, O don't see how the HGs and HTs distribution could help us to find where the final stage of full germanization of the language took place: I favorise Denmark, more able (archeology) to produce a melting pot unifying the diverses composants, but...?

  12. #12
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,536
    Points
    45,288
    Level
    65
    Points: 45,288, Level: 65
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 262
    Overall activity: 16.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    sorry for the 'O' in palce of 'I' -
    for the dates of 2000<>1000BC I confused with the influence of italic on germanic - the contacts with proto-baltic-slavic languages would be older (3000 to 2000 BC?)

  13. #13
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    27-06-11
    Posts
    29
    Points
    2,634
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,634, Level: 14
    Level completed: 62%, Points required for next Level: 116
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Finland



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    at the contrary I suppose Jaska was supporting the thesis or a scandinavian birth for full germanic development -
    That is correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN
    for I think, the presence of a lot of germanic recent loan words in finnic doesn't prove germanic formed in Scandinavia -
    the lack of baltic loan words in finnic doesn't prove much more -
    My point was that there are VERY EARLY Germanic loanwords in Finnic and Saami - earlier than in Balto-Slavic (google the source I gave). You cannot explain the situation with any other solution than the Scandinavian homeland for Germanic - or can you?

    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN
    for I red and believe knowing the contacts between proto-germanic and proto-baltic-slavic languages is proven, and dated from between 2000 to 1000 BC apporximatively (between separation of celtic and italic and celtic loan words in germanic)- I red also that some proto-satem-I-E and some proto-basque was supposed having been spoken in Scandinvia before germanic, according to a survey about substratum words in Saami finnic -(for proto-satem I can imagine some first bands of 'corded' Y-R1a... - ) - the two can make sense -
    I think you have mistaken something here... In Northern Scandinavia there was some Palaeo-European language spoken before Saami, but in Southern Scandinavia there are no traces of any language preceding Germanic. No satem-languages in Scandinavia, either, and certainly no Proto-Basque. At least no serious linguist has presented such hypotheses.

    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN
    now, O don't see how the HGs and HTs distribution could help us to find where the final stage of full germanization of the language took place: I favorise Denmark, more able (archeology) to produce a melting pot unifying the diverses composants, but...?
    Denmark could have been included in the Scandinavian homeland, because we also see Germanic and Celtic develop close to each other.

    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN
    for the dates of 2000<>1000BC I confused with the influence of italic on germanic - the contacts with proto-baltic-slavic languages would be older (3000 to 2000 BC?)

    Hmmm... It seems that Northwest Indo-European dialect only developed into distinctive Germanic and Balto-Slavic branches at the 2nd millennium, so there could not be so early contacts.


  14. #14
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,536
    Points
    45,288
    Level
    65
    Points: 45,288, Level: 65
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 262
    Overall activity: 16.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Jaska View Post
    That is correct.


    My point was that there are VERY EARLY Germanic loanwords in Finnic and Saami - earlier than in Balto-Slavic (google the source I gave). You cannot explain the situation with any other solution than the Scandinavian homeland for Germanic - or can you?


    I think you have mistaken something here... In Northern Scandinavia there was some Palaeo-European language spoken before Saami, but in Southern Scandinavia there are no traces of any language preceding Germanic. No satem-languages in Scandinavia, either, and certainly no Proto-Basque. At least no serious linguist has presented such hypotheses.


    Denmark could have been included in the Scandinavian homeland, because we also see Germanic and Celtic develop close to each other.


    Hmmm... It seems that Northwest Indo-European dialect only developed into distinctive Germanic and Balto-Slavic branches at the 2nd millennium, so there could not be so early contacts.

    [/COLOR]
    firstable, thank for having red my post!

    I 'll try to read something about dates of germanic loans in finnic and balto-slavic - perhaps you are right - keep in mind that some common I-E roots in germanic and balto-slavic can be older than germanic full identification (shift), and not only loan words! finnic is not I-E, this changes the comparison -

    the abstract I red spoke about a sort of proto-basque language and an other language with some satemic traits, I think NOT a fully evolved satem language - I agree it was about Saami substratum, but saami language pertains too to finnic? the proto-basque was maybe an extrapolation concerning paleoeuroepan words roots found too in basque?

    I don't understand to well your meaning about denmark - what remains true is that Denmark could be, yes, included in Scandinavia at one time

  15. #15
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,536
    Points
    45,288
    Level
    65
    Points: 45,288, Level: 65
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 262
    Overall activity: 16.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    I accept finally the Jaska's opinion: germanic could be ancient in Scandinavia, even if that don't prove the germanic formation took place there OR only there -
    I 'm trying to put things one with another : not very easy !
    1- H.HUBERT thought germanic People was a mix of nordic people (yet a mix of hunters-gatherers and neolithic peasants ?) indo-europeanized by bearers a culture he named 'carpodace', I suppose coming previously from the North Carpathians or through Carparthians ; I think he saw them as a kind of Illyrians. I don't remember (I have no more the book) where he placed the complete germanization (and first shift). I note illyrian is classified satem by linguists – Corded could have been spoken a partially satemized language -
    2- linguistically, some scholars says : germanic shows very late contact with celtic languages, old contacts with italic languages, and between both, contacts with a partially satemized languages or an old form of I-E not evolved completely towards a centum or satem position. This not well evolved or partially satemized language could have been the Corded's one = 1- (I recall the possible satemic substrata in Saami finnic). Male elite Y-R1a (Z645/Z283/Z282 lately >?>Z284? # Z458)
    3- on an other side, Y-R1b-U106 seams having evolved in Northern Europe (hypothesis A), being « rich » enough even along Baltic shores until Estonia (it's true that germanic tribes occuped Baltic lands, supposed they were being got down from Scandinavia, and that later « Teutons » knights recovered N-E Europe on cost of Slavs). U106 could have been there in ancient enough times, as Y-R1b-L10 is represented in Northern Europe along with other R1b-subHGs of R-P312... Nevertheless we can imagine a set of Y-R1b-U106 came along with some Y-I2a2 from East Carpathians-West Urkaina (hypothesis B) at Bronze Age or even at B.B. Times (-2500?), passed between future italic(-celtic) Y-R1b-P312(+ some Y-I2a1b) and Corded people along Danau river but taking more northwards in Bohem (Oder, Saale, Elbe rivers) and merging with Corded in Thuringen/S-Saxony-Anhalt : I rather think U106 as a whole separated completely from other Y-R1b even if they merged with their cousins soon enough after due to several movements, present days distribution is clear enough – I keep in mind that an heavy 'corded' demic element was present at some Unetice periods (non-metric survey of teeth + metric surveys) with very lighter element of B.B. Origin (greater influence for culture than for genes) but that as a whole the Unetice population was more homogenous considering males & females, and somewhat different (I thought first it was only the neolithic people element which give differences but perhaps I was wrong)) : I can think too that some centum I-E other than neolithic people element was taking part in Unetice development – I should not be surprised if some more numerous surveys about ancient DNA tought us that some Y-R1b-U106 was already present beside a lot of Y-R1a among Corded people – so : ancient contact at the southern merges of Corded culture between Y-R1a and Y-R1b-U106 without any conclusion about culture here -
    4- we can imaginea possible intermediate centum I-E language that could be the famous but not to well known 'northwest block I-E'– some shared words in germanic and satem languages could be loan words by baltic and slavic contacts, whatever the direction of movement, and not only PIE cognates : I have not the knowledge to answer ; this N-W block can have been the language of the bulk of Y-R1b-U106 – the apparently cognates words anterior to the germanic shift could be recent enough, spite of that... when comparing I-E modern languages, slavic and baltic « sons » don't show very more links to germanic than any other european I-E descendant – phonetically concerning PIE *Bh- , *Dh-, *Gh-, slavic is like germanic, but celtic too..., the three of them separated from hellenic and italic for these evolutions but it is rather italic and hellenic that seam marginal here -
    5- finally, the germanic quality seam officially acquired lately, not before the 1000 BC, and so not preceding the Iron Age (Hallstatt) which saw some tribes movements from Austria-Bohemia areas northwards to Southern Scandinavia – a lot of skeletons proved that, showing an (elite only?) mixture of numerous near 'nordic' types with rarest other types ('danubian' like among them, certainly of previous neolithic stock, and represented more by autosomals than by Y-DNA, and some 'kymric' or 'iron-celtic' influence too : lower crania, shorter faces : interesting because very different from both 'corded' and 'danubian' types, and 'corded' types dominated in Eastern Hallstatt, so the people that « climbed » to Denmark at Iron Ages showed some Western Hallstatt mixing) – so this near 'nordic' type was not indentical too 'corded', so certainly Y-R1a was surely present but I don't discard the Y-R1b-U106 and lesser yet Y-R1b-P312 and downstreams... the contemporan U106 of Austria are a thorn in my foot : I don't know if they have been present there for a long time (the genitors of the portion of U106 I should place very easy among the first Belgae Celts, centred on Bohemia perhaps) or if they represent the later arrived Germanics from North ??? I avow I don't imagine the 60% U106 in Y-R1b as only from celtic times... and Belgae had the possibility to take U106 from more northern lands... my meaning of an ancient northern well separated position for Y-R1b-U106 still seams the best explanation of today distribution -
    6- when reading about Trichterbecher and Jastorf in Wikipedia, and too germanic languages , I concluded that neolithical Trichterbecher was of Long Barrows culture inspiration or at least dominance, atlantic and maritime – the ancient germanic loan words in finnish are anterior to Jastorf culture, seamingly, according to someones – if true, that could prove the germanic or proto-germanic was spoken yet in Scandinavia before Iron Age and that the Hallstatt « Ironers » going to Denmark was more on the celtic side and just influenced positively the late mix of Trichterbecher + Nordic Bronze Age to create Jastorf and neighboring cultures : period of the celtic loanwords in germanic ? -
    7-the problem of the shift is very boring because we can assume that some populations in Central Europe had the 'hardning' or 'unvoicing' tendancy (see the second high germanic shift and the same tendancy to invoicing in hungarian, according to some linguists, and I think in genuine rhaetic language) and the finnic languages have the same one... people merging with Celts who have the inverse tendancy! In modern german language the focus appears being south the Danau river, in Switzerland and Austria, maybe rhaetian ? (but I suppose diverging facts are more reliable than converging facts?) so the question of geographical source of unvoicing is still there – and it is not sure that the Iron Age people going northwards was the cause of the shift, upon all if they was of celtic inspiration : rather the contrary ...
    8- So for me, some Y-I1 quasi autochtonous bearers passed in Scania from South Baltic shores, through Denmark : unknown language for me – some mixtures of neolithic southeaterners and of atlantic megalithers (Y-R1B-P312>>-L21 in the mix?) settled in the same regions after, maybe already I(E speakers, maybe not) – at Chalcolithic times or Early Bronze Age, a lot of Y-R1a ('corded') passed through Denmark , surely with Y-I1 and some rarest Y-R1b-U106 : quasi sure : I-E language partially satemized – only after, but before Iron Age, a contribution of B.B. People (centum) of unknown previous DNA, but having accultured a lot of R1b people (more P312/U152 around south Rhinelands, more U106 around north Rhineland and frisia) and the osmose subseuqnelty made like that with ancient nordic (first I1s) habits gave way to the proto-germanic language where the 'nordic' package were very scarce and that have been completed by celtic loanwords only after – I don't oppose Denmark (continental) from Scandinavia : I believe it has been the strongest center of attraction and diffusion (« market », « pass ») - I think the BB accultured people was centum I-E speakers, but not celtic (northwest I-E) or not already celtic – the U152 of North Denmark and southern coastal Norway could very well be linked to celtic Cimbri and Teutons, after all : from Bohemia Hallstatt ? I red the cauldron from Denmark, considered and denied as celtic, show technics and some stuff of celtic Gallia or Bavaria – the language shift in germanic could well have taken place in or close around Scandinavia, and we are not obliged to separate continent and Scandinavia for the cristallization of germanic -


    Just some thoughts – a try to summarize and synthetize -

  16. #16
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran10000 Experience Points
    zanipolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    22-03-11
    Posts
    2,073
    Points
    22,792
    Level
    46
    Points: 22,792, Level: 46
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 758
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - Z19945
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1a4o

    Ethnic group
    Down Under
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    I accept finally the Jaska's opinion: germanic could be ancient in Scandinavia, even if that don't prove the germanic formation took place there OR only there -
    I 'm trying to put things one with another : not very easy !
    1- H.HUBERT thought germanic People was a mix of nordic people (yet a mix of hunters-gatherers and neolithic peasants ?) indo-europeanized by bearers a culture he named 'carpodace', I suppose coming previously from the North Carpathians or through Carparthians ; I think he saw them as a kind of Illyrians. I don't remember (I have no more the book) where he placed the complete germanization (and first shift). I note illyrian is classified satem by linguists – Corded could have been spoken a partially satemized language -
    2- linguistically, some scholars says : germanic shows very late contact with celtic languages, old contacts with italic languages, and between both, contacts with a partially satemized languages or an old form of I-E not evolved completely towards a centum or satem position. This not well evolved or partially satemized language could have been the Corded's one = 1- (I recall the possible satemic substrata in Saami finnic). Male elite Y-R1a (Z645/Z283/Z282 lately >?>Z284? # Z458)
    3- on an other side, Y-R1b-U106 seams having evolved in Northern Europe (hypothesis A), being « rich » enough even along Baltic shores until Estonia (it's true that germanic tribes occuped Baltic lands, supposed they were being got down from Scandinavia, and that later « Teutons » knights recovered N-E Europe on cost of Slavs). U106 could have been there in ancient enough times, as Y-R1b-L10 is represented in Northern Europe along with other R1b-subHGs of R-P312... Nevertheless we can imagine a set of Y-R1b-U106 came along with some Y-I2a2 from East Carpathians-West Urkaina (hypothesis B) at Bronze Age or even at B.B. Times (-2500?), passed between future italic(-celtic) Y-R1b-P312(+ some Y-I2a1b) and Corded people along Danau river but taking more northwards in Bohem (Oder, Saale, Elbe rivers) and merging with Corded in Thuringen/S-Saxony-Anhalt : I rather think U106 as a whole separated completely from other Y-R1b even if they merged with their cousins soon enough after due to several movements, present days distribution is clear enough – I keep in mind that an heavy 'corded' demic element was present at some Unetice periods (non-metric survey of teeth + metric surveys) with very lighter element of B.B. Origin (greater influence for culture than for genes) but that as a whole the Unetice population was more homogenous considering males & females, and somewhat different (I thought first it was only the neolithic people element which give differences but perhaps I was wrong)) : I can think too that some centum I-E other than neolithic people element was taking part in Unetice development – I should not be surprised if some more numerous surveys about ancient DNA tought us that some Y-R1b-U106 was already present beside a lot of Y-R1a among Corded people – so : ancient contact at the southern merges of Corded culture between Y-R1a and Y-R1b-U106 without any conclusion about culture here -
    4- we can imaginea possible intermediate centum I-E language that could be the famous but not to well known 'northwest block I-E'– some shared words in germanic and satem languages could be loan words by baltic and slavic contacts, whatever the direction of movement, and not only PIE cognates : I have not the knowledge to answer ; this N-W block can have been the language of the bulk of Y-R1b-U106 – the apparently cognates words anterior to the germanic shift could be recent enough, spite of that... when comparing I-E modern languages, slavic and baltic « sons » don't show very more links to germanic than any other european I-E descendant – phonetically concerning PIE *Bh- , *Dh-, *Gh-, slavic is like germanic, but celtic too..., the three of them separated from hellenic and italic for these evolutions but it is rather italic and hellenic that seam marginal here -
    5- finally, the germanic quality seam officially acquired lately, not before the 1000 BC, and so not preceding the Iron Age (Hallstatt) which saw some tribes movements from Austria-Bohemia areas northwards to Southern Scandinavia – a lot of skeletons proved that, showing an (elite only?) mixture of numerous near 'nordic' types with rarest other types ('danubian' like among them, certainly of previous neolithic stock, and represented more by autosomals than by Y-DNA, and some 'kymric' or 'iron-celtic' influence too : lower crania, shorter faces : interesting because very different from both 'corded' and 'danubian' types, and 'corded' types dominated in Eastern Hallstatt, so the people that « climbed » to Denmark at Iron Ages showed some Western Hallstatt mixing) – so this near 'nordic' type was not indentical too 'corded', so certainly Y-R1a was surely present but I don't discard the Y-R1b-U106 and lesser yet Y-R1b-P312 and downstreams... the contemporan U106 of Austria are a thorn in my foot : I don't know if they have been present there for a long time (the genitors of the portion of U106 I should place very easy among the first Belgae Celts, centred on Bohemia perhaps) or if they represent the later arrived Germanics from North ??? I avow I don't imagine the 60% U106 in Y-R1b as only from celtic times... and Belgae had the possibility to take U106 from more northern lands... my meaning of an ancient northern well separated position for Y-R1b-U106 still seams the best explanation of today distribution -
    6- when reading about Trichterbecher and Jastorf in Wikipedia, and too germanic languages , I concluded that neolithical Trichterbecher was of Long Barrows culture inspiration or at least dominance, atlantic and maritime – the ancient germanic loan words in finnish are anterior to Jastorf culture, seamingly, according to someones – if true, that could prove the germanic or proto-germanic was spoken yet in Scandinavia before Iron Age and that the Hallstatt « Ironers » going to Denmark was more on the celtic side and just influenced positively the late mix of Trichterbecher + Nordic Bronze Age to create Jastorf and neighboring cultures : period of the celtic loanwords in germanic ? -
    7-the problem of the shift is very boring because we can assume that some populations in Central Europe had the 'hardning' or 'unvoicing' tendancy (see the second high germanic shift and the same tendancy to invoicing in hungarian, according to some linguists, and I think in genuine rhaetic language) and the finnic languages have the same one... people merging with Celts who have the inverse tendancy! In modern german language the focus appears being south the Danau river, in Switzerland and Austria, maybe rhaetian ? (but I suppose diverging facts are more reliable than converging facts?) so the question of geographical source of unvoicing is still there – and it is not sure that the Iron Age people going northwards was the cause of the shift, upon all if they was of celtic inspiration : rather the contrary ...
    8- So for me, some Y-I1 quasi autochtonous bearers passed in Scania from South Baltic shores, through Denmark : unknown language for me – some mixtures of neolithic southeaterners and of atlantic megalithers (Y-R1B-P312>>-L21 in the mix?) settled in the same regions after, maybe already I(E speakers, maybe not) – at Chalcolithic times or Early Bronze Age, a lot of Y-R1a ('corded') passed through Denmark , surely with Y-I1 and some rarest Y-R1b-U106 : quasi sure : I-E language partially satemized – only after, but before Iron Age, a contribution of B.B. People (centum) of unknown previous DNA, but having accultured a lot of R1b people (more P312/U152 around south Rhinelands, more U106 around north Rhineland and frisia) and the osmose subseuqnelty made like that with ancient nordic (first I1s) habits gave way to the proto-germanic language where the 'nordic' package were very scarce and that have been completed by celtic loanwords only after – I don't oppose Denmark (continental) from Scandinavia : I believe it has been the strongest center of attraction and diffusion (« market », « pass ») - I think the BB accultured people was centum I-E speakers, but not celtic (northwest I-E) or not already celtic – the U152 of North Denmark and southern coastal Norway could very well be linked to celtic Cimbri and Teutons, after all : from Bohemia Hallstatt ? I red the cauldron from Denmark, considered and denied as celtic, show technics and some stuff of celtic Gallia or Bavaria – the language shift in germanic could well have taken place in or close around Scandinavia, and we are not obliged to separate continent and Scandinavia for the cristallization of germanic -


    Just some thoughts – a try to summarize and synthetize -

    I believe U106 was a sister of U152 and it formed in eastern austria, witha mix of celtic, rhaetian, illyrian (nori tribe) ,venetic and gallic people, it then moved via the danube and rhine rivers to the netherlands.
    The austrian portion got smaller because there where more migrations in austria then the northern area over time.

    There where no germans in the area of Halstatt or at that time in the alps. U106 was initially never a germanic marker

  17. #17
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,536
    Points
    45,288
    Level
    65
    Points: 45,288, Level: 65
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 262
    Overall activity: 16.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by zanipolo View Post
    I believe U106 was a sister of U152 and it formed in eastern austria, witha mix of celtic, rhaetian, illyrian (nori tribe) ,venetic and gallic people, it then moved via the danube and rhine rivers to the netherlands.
    The austrian portion got smaller because there where more migrations in austria then the northern area over time.

    There where no germans in the area of Halstatt or at that time in the alps. U106 was initially never a germanic marker
    Problem of timing here

    1- I never said Hallstatt was germanic, according to old scholars it would have been W-Celts and E-Illyrians, to simplify -
    2- R1b-U106 is rather at the level of P312 and not U152 – I feel it separated from the bulk of L10 early enough, North the Carpathians (not in them) and colonized partially the Northern Plain on its way to North and Northwest, where it became the first HG on the North Sea shores – maybe yet pushed by some avanguards of Y-R1a – the mutation L10>>U106 in North, not central Europe ? Rather possible -
    3- the most of U106 we find today in Central and Southern Europe (Balkans) are more the result of late 'germanic wandelungen' or sometimes, rarely, the result of some celtic Belgae, than other thing – the Tyrolians show more than 60% of U106 ratio within Y-R1b, it's to say = the Netherlands and some western parts of Norway, BUT TOO 16% Y-I1 what is very strong ! : more germanic (England mean : 14%, Flanders mean 13%) – The Hallstatt people, of partially celtic stocks, that came northward, played the rôle of « booster » upon an already proto- of full germanic population centred around Denmark and encompassing South Scandinavia (deductive opinion, not proved fact) -

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 70
    Last Post: 25-04-14, 20:42
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-09-11, 09:31
  3. Cool Germanic Languages Link
    By Gary C. in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 25-07-09, 14:43
  4. Words from old Germanic languages in modern English and Latin languages
    By Maciamo in forum European Culture & History
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 15-12-06, 13:05
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 17-06-05, 04:13

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •