Where did proto-IE language start?

[LeBrok]

LeBrok
"Teal" component peaks in Caucasus and Hindukush, so it is similar to West Asian component. Davidski who introduced this term think they are farmers. http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/04/the-teal-people-did-they-actually-exist.html
Maciamo thinks it is related to the G1 farmers.

The problem of Cucuteni is also linguistic. It can't explain Kartvelian connection. Or we must made the assumption that the Kartvelian is linked to Cucuteni farmers.
Also let's not forget about some important connections with Semitic even the Sumerian.

I am not saying that Cucuteni didn't play any role. But itcan't explain all farmer like influence IMHO.

Good point, it does suggest bigger influence of Mykop culture.

What if Cucuteni gave Yamnaya farming and language and Mykop metallurgy and other technology. Vu a la, Yamnaya bronze age package.

 

[Angela]

P.S. Here's a THEORY since I do not have any convictions. However, I think this makes much more sense, in that Maykyop L23*/Z2103s Indo-Europianized R1a north of them, which also explains the L23*/Z2103 in Eastern Europe.

It's a good effort, so, no disprespect intended, but I still think Maciamo's model is the best, certainly once we get to Europe, and it was done before any of these ancient dna results were available.

 

[Rethel]

So it is now mine and Angela's fault and not your perfect English skills?

Absolutly not!
This is obvious that I and many others have problems with that.

But as I see you didn't want uderstand even that, what I actually
wrote, because it wasn't about language misunderstandings.
And I don't belive that you didn't get it!

Then create your own world.

You see what is your problem? No? you do not see? Or maybe you don't want...?

Keep it to yourself.

...rather you dont want.
Because every one must agree with you.

All the options are possible at the moment.

So what is your problem if everything is possible?

Think rather what is most likely, most possible, most probable. Use statistical part of your brain.

Yes, I do. Do you?

Exactly my point. From myriad of smaller languages we have one unifying language (farmer one) covering big area, and not necessarily related to the smaller ones. See the pattern?

Yes, I see, but I was talking about something totally else.
I only was kind, and I answered on your question, which
wasn't connected whith that what I was talking about.

Btw, why I must see your pattern, and you dont want see mine?

 

[arvistro]

Turks nomads replaced Greek farmers
Hungars nomads only elite (!) replaced whatever IE was spoken by local farmers.
PIE nomads replaced whatever was spoken by Neolithic farmers.

Edit: Arab nomads replaced whatever was spoken in wide territories..

 

[Rethel]

Deleted, not on the subject.

 

[Sile]

Deleted, not on the subject.

 

[Angela]

QUOTE=LeBrok;460357]Good point, it does suggest bigger influence of Mykop culture.

What if Cucuteni gave Yamnaya farming and language and Mykop metallurgy and other technology. Vu a la, Yamnaya bronze age package.[/QUOTE]

Yet it's the language that has to have come into contact with Kartvellian, and, more importantly, Uralic. Given that, the steppe is still more likely than the Balkans, in my opinion.

Not that there aren't linguists who have postulated a Balkan "homeland", of course (Diakonov). It's just that it doesn't satisfy that requirement.

Even Renfrew's "newer" model doesn't fix that problem, in my opinion, because that posits Anatolian staying behind while the rest of the Indo-European languages dispersed into Europe and then onto the steppe. So again, no opportunity to be influenced by Uralic until very late.

For the same reason, I don't think the Gramkelidze Ivanov model is very satisfactory. We also now know the genetics are against it. The gene flow seems to have gone from near Europe to Sintashta and then onwards.

I sort of like the Holm model, although I don't know if there's any better archaeology for their proposed migration path for Anatolian than the Anthony-Ringe model:

.

 

[Finalise]

Lebrok, as you said, I think the R1a and R1b have the "farmer" influence in common, be it genetic or linguistic influence. A lot of historians believe the Maykop were the ones who passed on their culture to Yamna, and the Z2103 marker imo could be a sign of the Maykop mixing with steppe individuals. It's been proven H is also a native European mtDna, and it's difficult for the Maykop to influence Yamna culture so deeply simply through bride exchanging.. I certainly believe the steppe had a lot of R1b1 hunter gatherers, but I find it difficult to believe it was the L23 kind of hunter gatherers, since L23* and M269* are found in the Middle East and Central Asia. If R1b in the middle east is a result of L23 downstream, you wouldn't be able to find these samples at the greatest frequency here.I'm most convinced by the IE movements being a migration along the Danube of Indo-Europeniazed Cucuteni farmers by Yamna individuals (massive founder effect in CE/WE which can only be supported by farming), and R1a possibly being a Indo-Europeniazed (by L23*/Z2103*?) Uralic marker, since we have linguistic evidence that Uralics were in contact with IEs. I certainly think this theory would be helped if all R1b in CW would be L23*/Z2103*.It could also be that people waiting for L51 to show up in Western Yamna (non-Cucuteni) be right, but genetics has shown that history is much much more complex than we think it was.

 

[Regio X]

The Tangled Roots of English

[h=1]http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/24/science/new-light-on-the-roots-of-english.html[/h]

 

[Angela]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/24/science/new-light-on-the-roots-of-english.html

Thanks for the article. So the debate goes on.

Renfrew is now on his third model, I think. This one would seem to posit proto-Indo-European or pre-proto-Indo-European south of the Caucasus, and "Anatolian" speakers staying behind while the rest go up onto the steppe, yes?

Sort of like this:

h

 

[LeBrok]

Turks nomads replaced Greek farmers

Yes, in same way IE introduced their language over farmers of Europe. However they were no hunter-gatherers. In Yamnaya we have situation of farmers meeting hunter-gatherers.

Hungars nomads only elite (!) replaced whatever IE was spoken by local farmers.

I think Magyars came from European part of Russia, and they might have been farmers already. Definitely not HGs.

PIE nomads replaced whatever was spoken by Neolithic farmers.

Yes, exactly, but they PIE were already farmers/herders, not hunter gatherers.

Edit: Arab nomads replaced whatever was spoken in wide territories..

Yes, but again they were no hunter gatherers. They were herders with huge admixture of NEF.

I'm not sure if there is even one known example of farmers learning hunter gatherer language.

 

[LeBrok]

Yet it's the language that has to have come into contact with Kartvellian, and, more importantly, Uralic. Given that, the steppe is still more likely than the Balkans, in my opinion.

Not that there aren't linguists who have postulated a Balkan "homeland", of course (Diakonov). It's just that it doesn't satisfy that requirement.


Even Renfrew's "newer" model doesn't fix that problem, in my opinion, because that posits Anatolian staying behind while the rest of the Indo-European languages dispersed into Europe and then onto the steppe. So again, no opportunity to be influenced by Uralic until very late.

For the same reason, I don't think the Gramkelidze Ivanov model is very satisfactory. We also now know the genetics are against it. The gene flow seems to have gone from near Europe to Sintashta and then onwards.


I sort of like the Holm model, although I don't know if there's any better archaeology for their proposed migration path for Anatolian than the Anthony-Ringe model:

Definitely I agree, IE culture and language consolidated in Yamnaya, either whole Yamnaya or in western part. I was just being inquisitive to find out where did the language, should we call it pre-proto-IE, came from. I have a hard time to imagine that language could have been of HG origin, for the reasons introduced in post 1. It is easier with cultural elements, as we can trace them to farmers from south, and also metallurgy to Mykop. Even the Cucuteni burned house horizon was spread way inside West Yamnaya, IIRC. So why should it be different with the language?
I'm just hoping that we can find some clay tablets with some words on it in Cucuteni territory in the future. It could answer the question.

 

[LeBrok]

Lebrok, as you said, I think the R1a and R1b have the "farmer" influence in common, be it genetic or linguistic influence. A lot of historians believe the Maykop were the ones who passed on their culture to Yamna, and the Z2103 marker imo could be a sign of the Maykop mixing with steppe individuals. It's been proven H is also a native European mtDna, and it's difficult for the Maykop to influence Yamna culture so deeply simply through bride exchanging.. I certainly believe the steppe had a lot of R1b1 hunter gatherers, but I find it difficult to believe it was the L23 kind of hunter gatherers, since L23* and M269* are found in the Middle East and Central Asia. If R1b in the middle east is a result of L23 downstream, you wouldn't be able to find these samples at the greatest frequency here.I'm most convinced by the IE movements being a migration along the Danube of Indo-Europeniazed Cucuteni farmers by Yamna individuals (massive founder effect in CE/WE which can only be supported by farming), and R1a possibly being a Indo-Europeniazed (by L23*/Z2103*?) Uralic marker, since we have linguistic evidence that Uralics were in contact with IEs. I certainly think this theory would be helped if all R1b in CW would be L23*/Z2103*.It could also be that people waiting for L51 to show up in Western Yamna (non-Cucuteni) be right, but genetics has shown that history is much much more complex than we think it was.

Absolutely, till the dust settles, we'll be dealing with few possible scenarios.

 

[arvistro]

Yes, in same way IE introduced their language over farmers of Europe. However they were no hunter-gatherers. In Yamnaya we have situation of farmers meeting hunter-gatherers.


I think Magyars came from European part of Russia, and they might have been farmers already. Definitely not HGs.

Yes, exactly, but they PIE were already farmers/herders, not hunter gatherers.

Yes, but again they were no hunter gatherers. They were herders with huge admixture of NEF.

I'm not sure if there is even one known example of farmers learning hunter gatherer language.

Do you think proto-Finns Ugric was also farmers language?

Edit: to not necessarily prolong discussion - No! All Proto-FU speakers have cognates only for hunter gatherer terms.
And yet Hungarians (whom you call farmers?) learned the hg derived language. Even more tought it to some Central Euro farmers.
Also I dont think having % of ENF genes is necessary to pass one's language. That is racist.

 

[bicicleur 2]

Thanks for the article. So the debate goes on.

Renfrew is now on his third model, I think. This one would seem to posit proto-Indo-European or pre-proto-Indo-European south of the Caucasus, and "Anatolian" speakers staying behind while the rest go up onto the steppe, yes?

Sort of like this:

h

yes, this is possible
but then it seems Renfrew has taken over the steppe hypothesis
and now he's allready speculating what happend pré-PIE

 

[LeBrok]

Do you think proto-Finns Ugric was also farmers language?

Edit: to not necessarily prolong discussion - No! All Proto-FU speakers have cognates only for hunter gatherer terms.

Great, the farmers didn't teach them hunting, I'm fine with that. But where is the rest of their vocabulary from? I mentioned few times that Yamnaya was the place were IE language took the final form. Meaning that not all the vocabulary came from farmers. There was HG substratum, I think.
There is a possibility that FU tribes had a very slow and minimal contact with farmers around them that they retained their original HG languages. It might be a reason why FU languages are so different from one another.

And yet Hungarians (whom you call farmers?) learned the hg derived language. Even more tought it to some Central Euro farmers.

I don't think there is a consensus where Hungarian language came from, the Huns, the Magyars or other nomadic groups, so I won't argue about that. However the main point still stands, they were not hunter gatherers, but rather nomadic herders at that point, and possibly with some farmer admixture.

Also I dont think having % of ENF genes is necessary to pass one's language. That is racist.

I never said that it is necessary to have ENF genes to speak farmer language. I always said that farmer genes are necessary to be a farmer. If it comes to language, it is not necessary, but most likely that farmer language flows to HGs. If you have contrary examples, you are welcome to share with us. Just don't make it personal or emotional. I'm neither for it or against it, I'm just describing what I think is a most likely scenario, that's all it is. The parallel of language transfer is based on modern, well known, historical events.

 

[LeBrok]

Does anyone know if there is common farmer vocabulary, common metallurgy, or hunting vocabulary in IE languages?

 

[arvistro]

Come one Hungarian language comes from proto-FU. That is science.
Proto-FU was originally HG, that is also science.
Modern Hungarians are farmers. That is a fact.
Hence farmers do speak language derived from proto-HG language. Just like Estonian and Finnish farmers do.

So, PIE COULD come from pre-PIE that was HG, learn few words from farmers and create PIE.

 

[Rethel]

Le Brok as usually are creating non existing problems.

It is my fault, because I was aswerd on his question which wasn't necesserly.

Case is very simple: R1 = Indoeropean speakers.
Last common stage of this languages that is Yamana stage.
Yamna N and S = R1.

That's all.

LeBrok, you are showing yourself as a very reasonable man.
This my statement - reasonable and correct - you don't like. Why?

Because as modern "reasonalbe man" you prefar undefinable untouchable hipothesising from the far, far past, partialy maybe even fiction time.
You have no clue for Cucuteni, any examples, no clue which gorup was speaking which language (Cucuteni, R1a, R1b) absolutly nothing - but you
are calling your vast speculations reasonable, but my statement, which is historically, linguisticly and archeologicly correct, is unreasonable? etrified:

Everything fine?
Or maybe hatred for me blinded you so much?

 

[Rethel]

yes, this is possible
but then it seems Renfrew has taken over the steppe hypothesis
and now he's allready speculating what happend pré-PIE

I'm curious - why jews had a such idea milennia ago?