Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 78

Thread: Are Uralic language speakers more closely related to Altaic speakers than Europeans?

  1. #51
    Advisor LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,295

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Idun View Post
    Your post did give the impression that Finns are not European and Nordic and closer to Nenets, that was a bad wording or intentional.
    I think your "pure" of whatever you want to be agenda, skews our posts (in your mind), giving you impression that we are attacking you and making you mongoloid. Obviously you think that Mongoloid means a lesser human being, for some reason.

    The ones that see the glass half empty, that is not the attitude you go hunting or to war.
    Can you be less cryptic?
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  2. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-11-13
    Posts
    117


    Country: Finland



    Than you got the wrong impression;
    The Finns are most def. European and mass-majority/rule (Anthropology) Nordo-Baltic;
    Are they like the Scandinavians (Germanic) - No there is a diff. in Culture (language) and Genetics;
    Nothing to do with Good or Bad;
    I see very much common in the culture and think it should be studied more, I think it shows intensive relations, most likely trade motivated.
    I cant see what language has to do with it, I see a distinct Baltic cultural region during the Iron Age that ended with the two churches pushing in the area.
    I dont really care how close the genetic links are but I am arguing the cultural ties did not develop without kinship, that was everything back then.
    That is only thing that protected your property and movements, no police back then.




    Thats exactly what Isolation is;
    I have said that 100s times; Archaic, Remote, Isolated all go hand in hand thats why Sardinians (the other isolated Europeans) are very close to Neolithic corpses and Finns/Estonians to Hunter-gather corpses; Isolated is not anything bad; In fact an impressive continuity;
    Yep, it is a fascinating history.


    Thats what i said 100s times as well;
    Europe must be looked at in Regions (Historic Regions) and not national (modern-day) boundaries;
    Both Autosomal-Admixture and mt&Y Hg's; many diff. feature from region to region; just look at the Alps; every 100 people village is diff. than the next 100 people village - but thats the extreme isolation (and incest);
    Those areas I listed are the trade hubs and where people mostl likely met and arranged marriages. Luckily many of those regions contain very preserved populations, even with long recorded family histories, so they should be intensively tested.


    The Lapps are an isolated case of their own and when exactly did the Lapps come to Fennoscandia area?
    Lappanoid/Brachycephalic is very common in Europe;
    The Brachycephalic Ancient Ligurians were examined (Dr. Virchow) to have exclusive similar features to the Lapps and they inhabited the Alpine areas;
    They probably came following the ice, Im not sure how many paleo populations there where, I think there where more than one population and Baltic Finns came after what ever they had of value to trade or tax.

    .


    I dont think that Fur-traders are that important compared to Hunter-gatherers in that region;
    A much broader realm of which maybe the Proto-Yakuts and Proto-Nemets were equally a part of and later changed course
    I would say the value of furs and controlling its trade has been undervalued as an source of wealth and a motivating factor in general, but that is just me.

  3. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-11-13
    Posts
    117


    Country: Finland



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    I think your "pure" of whatever you want to be agenda, skews our posts (in your mind), giving you impression that we are attacking you and making you mongoloid. Obviously you think that Mongoloid means a lesser human being, for some reason.

    That is the problem of those that feel the need to lie about Finns being recent arrivals from Asia compared to others in Europe, I am personally a fan of Asian cultures from Mongolia to Japan.


    Can you be less cryptic?
    Yes, I can answer in a Finnish dialect.

  4. #54
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-10-11
    Posts
    1,040

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Yes
    MtDNA haplogroup
    Yes

    Ethnic group
    German
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody1 View Post
    Nelis et al 2009
    http://www.plosone.org/article/info:....0005472#close


    I am Nelis et al and thats my agenda;
    Closest relatives Sami/Lapps proper Vikings as well - All Pure;
    I don't think this deviation of Finns shown is due to mongoloid admixture, maybe only due to a minor siberian admixture. There are countless admixture graphs in the web (dienekes, eurogenes,..) which show that this siberian admixture is marginal (~3%-10%, depending on the parameters) and not unique to Finns.

    I rather tend to think Finns and Saami are in fact closest to aboriginal europeans. IMHO this map shows the "purest" hunter-gatherer autosomal component which is possibly linked to U5:

  5. #55
    Regular Member Nobody1's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-13
    Posts
    1,033


    Country: Germany - Baden-Wurttemberg



    Quote Originally Posted by ElHorsto View Post
    I don't think this deviation of Finns shown is due to mongoloid admixture, maybe only due to a minor siberian admixture. There are countless admixture graphs in the web (dienekes, eurogenes,..) which show that this siberian admixture is marginal (~3%-10%, depending on the parameters) and not unique to Finns.

    I rather tend to think Finns and Saami are in fact closest to aboriginal europeans. IMHO this map shows the "purest" hunter-gatherer autosomal component which is possibly linked to U5:
    Never said they are;
    I said Finns are isolated and what that means goes without saying i.e. not inter-mixed with surrounding pops. hence the stronger Hunter-gatherer continuity;
    Dienekes and EuroGenes are just Hobby-Blogs; Great to look at but nothing academic about it - just a side note;

  6. #56
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-10-11
    Posts
    1,040

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Yes
    MtDNA haplogroup
    Yes

    Ethnic group
    German
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody1 View Post
    Never said they are;
    I said Finns are isolated and what that means goes without saying i.e. not inter-mixed with surrounding pops. hence the stronger Hunter-gatherer continuity;
    Ok, then I agree with you.

  7. #57
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    943

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    Yakuts and Nenets are not Turkic population,they are Siberian population .
    From what I knew,Turkic populations are Central Asians,coming from Altai Mountains.
    If you take this image ,with Turkic speakers:


    For me,is very clear that actually Yakuts were conquered by Turkic people and they adopted Turkic language,from the people that conquered them.
    I was not arguing here,I was just asking other people if they agree with the opinion that Yakuts were conquered by Turkic tribes and this is how they ended speaking a Turkic language.
    From what I know,average Finn got some Siberian admixture but I do not think that (Siberian admixture) can be put into the category of Mongoloid admixture.
    Mongolians are central Asians,they are different people,as way of behavior,as culture etc from Siberians.
    But this thread was about the fact if Uralic languages speakers are more closed to Altaic speakers,than to Europeans and from my point of view,Fino-Ugrian speakers (Uralic languages) are rather closed to either Germanic people,or Balto-Slavic (included Baltic and Slavic in same larger group) people.
    Would be very interesting to study folk music,folk customs and so on,between North Europeans,both Scandos and Balto-Slavs,from North Europe and Uralic speakers.
    Cause I think you will find common folk customs between them.
    For example,both Finns and Germanic speakers from Scandinavia share as a common folk custom that the bride should wear some piece of gold,on her chest/belly to bring fertility,at wedding.
    EDIT:
    This thread is becoming boring,without any Turkic native speaker coming here and bringing his/her arguments that Finno-Ugrian speakers are rather related to Turkic languages,than to Indo-European languages.

  8. #58
    Regular Member Templar's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-10-11
    Posts
    589

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G-L42
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H2a1

    Ethnic group
    Paleolithic European
    Country: Bosnia & Herzegovina



    "I rather tend to think Finns and Saami are in fact closest to aboriginal europeans"

    Nope, original paleolithic Europeans couldn't have been as light as the Finns and also not as Mongoloid as the Saami.

    Saami can't be aboriginal because: Cro-Magnon skulls have typical Caucasoid traits: high nose bridge, strong chin, and long skull length.

    Finns can't be aboriginal because: Blue eyes and blonde hair developed around the Black Sea only around 5,000 years and were spread by Indo-Europeans. They only spread throughout Europe during the Bronze Age.

  9. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-11-13
    Posts
    117


    Country: Finland



    Quote Originally Posted by Templar View Post
    "I rather tend to think Finns and Saami are in fact closest to aboriginal europeans"

    Nope, original paleolithic Europeans couldn't have been as light as the Finns and also not as Mongoloid as the Saami.

    Saami can't be aboriginal because: Cro-Magnon skulls have typical Caucasoid traits: high nose bridge, strong chin, and long skull length.

    Finns can't be aboriginal because: Blue eyes and blonde hair developed around the Black Sea only around 5,000 years and were spread by Indo-Europeans. They only spread throughout Europe during the Bronze Age.
    That must be it, did you know Arya means slave for Finns?

  10. #60
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-10-11
    Posts
    1,040

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Yes
    MtDNA haplogroup
    Yes

    Ethnic group
    German
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Templar View Post
    "I rather tend to think Finns and Saami are in fact closest to aboriginal europeans"
    Nope, original paleolithic Europeans couldn't have been as light as the Finns and also not as Mongoloid as the Saami.
    Why is this still relevant since we know genetic evidence?
    I also once thought the Saami were part-mongoloid, but now I realize they aren't. They show borealization as the east-baltic 'race' too. However, mesolithic hunter-gatherers were probably eurasian dwellers anyways, so their asian contacts were probably frequent (see amerindian SNP and STR admixtures in north-europeans).

    Saami can't be aboriginal because: Cro-Magnon skulls have typical Caucasoid traits: high nose bridge, strong chin, and long skull length.
    They very well can:



    Finns can't be aboriginal because: Blue eyes and blonde hair developed around the Black Sea only around 5,000 years and were spread by Indo-Europeans. They only spread throughout Europe during the Bronze Age.
    The La Brana sample has been tested positive for blue eyes already.

  11. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-11-13
    Posts
    117


    Country: Finland



    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    Yakuts and Nenets are not Turkic population,they are Siberian population .
    From what I knew,Turkic populations are Central Asians,coming from Altai Mountains.
    If you take this image ,with Turkic speakers:


    For me,is very clear that actually Yakuts were conquered by Turkic people and they adopted Turkic language,from the people that conquered them.
    I was not arguing here,I was just asking other people if they agree with the opinion that Yakuts were conquered by Turkic tribes and this is how they ended speaking a Turkic language.
    From what I know,average Finn got some Siberian admixture but I do not think that (Siberian admixture) can be put into the category of Mongoloid admixture.
    Mongolians are central Asians,they are different people,as way of behavior,as culture etc from Siberians.
    But this thread was about the fact if Uralic languages speakers are more closed to Altaic speakers,than to Europeans and from my point of view,Fino-Ugrian speakers (Uralic languages) are rather closed to either Germanic people,or Balto-Slavic (included Baltic and Slavic in same larger group) people.
    Would be very interesting to study folk music,folk customs and so on,between North Europeans,both Scandos and Balto-Slavs,from North Europe and Uralic speakers.
    Cause I think you will find common folk customs between them.

    For example,both Finns and Germanic speakers from Scandinavia share as a common folk custom that the bride should wear some piece of gold,on her chest/belly to bring fertility,at wedding.
    EDIT:
    This thread is becoming boring,without any Turkic native speaker coming here and bringing his/her arguments that Finno-Ugrian speakers are rather related to Turkic languages,than to Indo-European languages.
    You seem to understand some of this stuff, there are many common customs.
    Christmas is a good example, totally pagan tradition from Norway to Estonia.
    We still have people dressing up as a goat, I hate Santa, we should have theme parks with Odin and Thor.

  12. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-11-13
    Posts
    117


    Country: Finland


  13. #63
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    16-08-12
    Location
    Győr, Hungary
    Posts
    97

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2b*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2b1b

    Ethnic group
    Hungarian
    Country: Hungary



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Idun View Post
    You seem to understand some of this stuff, there are many common customs.
    Christmas is a good example, totally pagan tradition from Norway to Estonia.
    We still have people dressing up as a goat, I hate Santa, we should have theme parks with Odin and Thor.
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but Odin and Thor are Viking, Germanic gods. Finns aren't Germanic people. So why would you like a Viking god theme park? I know there are at about 300 000 Swedish Finns (suomenruotsalaiset) in Finnland, but the majority of the population is Finn. You have Väinämöinen, why do you need Thor?

  14. #64
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-11-13
    Posts
    117


    Country: Finland



    Quote Originally Posted by BakodiP View Post
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but Odin and Thor are Viking, Germanic gods. Finns aren't Germanic people. So why would you like a Viking god theme park? I know there are at about 300 000 Swedish Finns (suomenruotsalaiset) in Finnland, but the majority of the population is Finn. You have Väinämöinen, why do you need Thor?
    We actually have our own names for gods, just using english here.

  15. #65
    Regular Member Nobody1's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-13
    Posts
    1,033


    Country: Germany - Baden-Wurttemberg



    Quote Originally Posted by ElHorsto View Post
    Ok, then I agree with you.
    The so called Siberian component is a Mongoloid component;
    Acc. to the last 2 Academic studies (DiCristofaro/Rhagavan) the "Siberian" component is most common in folks like the Yakuts, Evenkis and Nganassans; All Mongoloid people; Finns or Lapps were not tested - no idea; Estonians have only minor traces of this Siberian admixture but much more than Lithuanians (who have almost none);

  16. #66
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-10-11
    Posts
    1,040

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Yes
    MtDNA haplogroup
    Yes

    Ethnic group
    German
    Country: Germany



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody1 View Post
    The so called Siberian component is a Mongoloid component;
    Acc. to the last 2 Academic studies (DiCristofaro/Rhagavan) the "Siberian" component is most common in folks like the Yakuts, Evenkis and Nganassans; All Mongoloid people; Finns or Lapps were not tested - no idea; Estonians have only minor traces of this Siberian admixture but much more than Lithuanians (who have almost none);
    Yeah, that seems to fit. According to K12b, Siberian admixture is ca. 7% in Finns, 2%-7% in Russians (depends on the sample) and 0% in Lithuanians. The Evenks have 84%, Yukagir have 80% and the Yakuts have 77%.
    Siberian admixture can be found in very tiny traces also in other european countries, but Finns and Russians (Saami not tested) have the most (although still minor) in europe. I think that their siberian admixture is different from the more common "amerindian" admixture and it is probably not of paleolithic origin but came later. I'm not sure whether it is linked to Y-HG N, because Lithuantians have it too, but they have 0% siberian.

  17. #67
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-11-13
    Posts
    117


    Country: Finland



    1 members found this post helpful.

  18. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-11-13
    Posts
    117


    Country: Finland



    There may in fact be multiple layers of Siberian gene flow into northeastern Europe after the initial ANE gene flow, as our analyses
    reported in SI 12 show that some Mordovians, Russians and Chuvash have Siberian-related admixture that is significantly more recent than that in Finns(SI12).
    http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...01552.full.pdf

    Did Nobody1 read the paper? Your first impressions?

  19. #69
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    31-08-13
    Posts
    37


    Country: Sweden



    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody1 View Post
    Finns arent close to Scandinavians in terms of Genetics;
    In autosomal-Admixture the Finns are completely isolated and Y-DNA Hg Finns are mostly N-M231 like the Mongoloids of Yakuts and Nenets further east;
    Finns are not "completly isolated", that is absurd. Finns are typical North Europeans, although heavily genetically drifted. Finns also have 6% Siberian genes. If Finns are plotted in a principal component analysis with other Europeans, their genetic drift ususually pulls them heavily in one direction, "taking over" the diagram. The Siberian component is ususually not visible. If Finns are plotted along Europeans and more distant people, they tend to cluster with Swedes, Estonians and Northern Russians.

    Swedes may be the closest relatives of Finns, but for Swedes, Finns are not the closest, due to the Finnish genetic drift and the closeness of Norwiegans and Danes.

    Haplogroup N in Europe must be seen as a marker for mesolithic genes, there is no other way to look at it. It is most common in the Baltic states and Finland, both refugia for mesolithic European genes, autosomal studies are very clear on that. It has a distant East Asian origin, but this hardly tells anything about origins of people today. It is merely a sign of some ancient migration.

  20. #70
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-11-13
    Posts
    117


    Country: Finland



    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    Finns are not "completly isolated", that is absurd. Finns are typical North Europeans, although heavily genetically drifted. Finns also have 6% Siberian genes. If Finns are plotted in a principal component analysis with other Europeans, their genetic drift ususually pulls them heavily in one direction, "taking over" the diagram. The Siberian component is ususually not visible. If Finns are plotted along Europeans and more distant people, they tend to cluster with Swedes, Estonians and Northern Russians.

    Swedes may be the closest relatives of Finns, but for Swedes, Finns are not the closest, due to the Finnish genetic drift and the closeness of Norwiegans and Danes.

    Haplogroup N in Europe must be seen as a marker for mesolithic genes, there is no other way to look at it. It is most common in the Baltic states and Finland, both refugia for mesolithic European genes, autosomal studies are very clear on that. It has a distant East Asian origin, but this hardly tells anything about origins of people today. It is merely a sign of some ancient migration.
    Finns will get their prehistory solved with the help of multidisciplinary science, having fun seeing it unravel.

    Have you ever thought possible that Æsir–Vanir War could be linked to Sveas and Finnics?
    If you take it literally that is what it basically says, could be that the Balto-Slavs have a better case, im not an expert of them.
    But I can compile a long list of things that match from the stuff I have read and know about the cultures.

  21. #71
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    943

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    Quote Originally Posted by Petter View Post
    Finns are not "completly isolated", that is absurd. Finns are typical North Europeans, although heavily genetically drifted. Finns also have 6% Siberian genes. If Finns are plotted in a principal component analysis with other Europeans, their genetic drift ususually pulls them heavily in one direction, "taking over" the diagram. The Siberian component is ususually not visible. If Finns are plotted along Europeans and more distant people, they tend to cluster with Swedes, Estonians and Northern Russians.

    Swedes may be the closest relatives of Finns, but for Swedes, Finns are not the closest, due to the Finnish genetic drift and the closeness of Norwiegans and Danes.

    Haplogroup N in Europe must be seen as a marker for mesolithic genes, there is no other way to look at it. It is most common in the Baltic states and Finland, both refugia for mesolithic European genes, autosomal studies are very clear on that. It has a distant East Asian origin, but this hardly tells anything about origins of people today. It is merely a sign of some ancient migration.
    I thought it depends on the area from where Swedes are coming.
    With North Swedes,being closest to Finns while South Swedes,being closest to Norwegians and Danes.
    EDIT:
    Whatever,this is if you calculate the distance taking only paternal lines.
    If you make an admixture test,depends on the test.
    I do remember to have seen a test about Swedes from North Sweden,about Y DNA and I remember that N was making most of the paternal lineages there,but I do not remember where I have seen it.
    Second was I1.
    Last edited by mihaitzateo; 25-12-13 at 21:22.

  22. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-11-13
    Posts
    117


    Country: Finland



    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    I thought it depends on the area from where Swedes are coming.
    With North Swedes,being closest to Finns while South Swedes,being closest to Norwegians and Danes.
    Yep, Svealand, Norrland and Gotland are more close historically than Götaland.

    But the strong mixing of population has been present in Sweden since its expansion.

    With right testing you could find out the ancient links and population movements.

  23. #73
    Regular Member Nobody1's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-13
    Posts
    1,033


    Country: Germany - Baden-Wurttemberg



    Quote Originally Posted by Idun View Post
    http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...01552.full.pdf

    Did Nobody1 read the paper? Your first impressions?
    And what exactly is your point or new insight?
    There may in fact be multiple layers of Siberian gene flow into northeastern Europe after the initial ANE gene flow, as our analyses

    And app. that Siberian gene flow (admixture) is more recent in Russians than Finns (i.e. older/more rooted);
    And you know who has the most Siberian (almost sole) admixture? Yakuts, Evenkis and Nganassans (and poss. also Nenets) all Mongoloid people; So what are you trying to convince me here by pointing out that Finns were originally Siberian (before Russians)??? Dont get it - and dont really care either;

  24. #74
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    31-08-13
    Posts
    37


    Country: Sweden



    Quote Originally Posted by ElHorsto View Post
    Yeah, that seems to fit. According to K12b, Siberian admixture is ca. 7% in Finns, 2%-7% in Russians (depends on the sample) and 0% in Lithuanians. The Evenks have 84%, Yukagir have 80% and the Yakuts have 77%.
    Siberian admixture can be found in very tiny traces also in other european countries, but Finns and Russians (Saami not tested) have the most (although still minor) in europe. I think that their siberian admixture is different from the more common "amerindian" admixture and it is probably not of paleolithic origin but came later. I'm not sure whether it is linked to Y-HG N, because Lithuantians have it too, but they have 0% siberian.
    Finns indeed have about 6% Siberian genes, which is very remarkable. The admixture date is quite recent and the most likely candidate for bringing this component is of course the Saami-speaking people. They were originally a people very like the Finns, since the language is very close (I assume both were primarily caucasoid). They must have encountered a Siberian people on their more Eastern route to their present areas however, and picked up a notable Siberian component. They have most likely lived throughout Finland in recent historical times (this is a hot debate topic), and the Finnish Siberian component correlates with Saami population density. There has also been some Saami presence in Estonia, were there is a small Siberian component.

    The Siberian component is not an ancestral Uralic component, however. The admixture date is far too recent and absent in many Uralic peoples (such as Latvians, who are N-rich and previously spoke Finnic languages).

  25. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-11-13
    Posts
    117


    Country: Finland



    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody1 View Post
    And what exactly is your point or new insight?
    There may in fact be multiple layers of Siberian gene flow into northeastern Europe after the initial ANE gene flow, as our analyses

    And app. that Siberian gene flow (admixture) is more recent in Russians than Finns (i.e. older/more rooted);
    And you know who has the most Siberian (almost sole) admixture? Yakuts, Evenkis and Nganassans (and poss. also Nenets) all Mongoloid people; So what are you trying to convince me here by pointing out that Finns were originally Siberian (before Russians)??? Dont get it - and dont really care either;
    I hope they cut your funding, you should concentrate on fruit flies.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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