Where did proto-IE language start?

[Twilight]

The only sample of basal R1b-L389* (and L389 is ancestral to M269) known so far, is from Puerto Rico. So according to your logic, R1b-L389 must have emerged 17,200 years ago (because this is how old L389 is) in America, and must have migrated to Eurasia on reed boats, ca. 16,800 years ago (TMRCA), where it later gave rise to R1b-P297 and ultimately to R1b-M269.

Really, looking at modern distributions is not such a good idea...

Just like people migrated from Europe to Puerto Rico, people also migrated from elsewhere to Pakistan.



If by "indigenous" you mean basal, then there is basal R1b-L389* in the Americas. And nowhere else.

The only basal R1b-L389* identified so far is this guy from Puerto Rico (id:HG00640 PUR):

https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L389/

I'm waiting for Genetiker to come and say that it proves R1b migration to America 16,500 years ago.

That's interesting if confirmed. Well there was an old R1b map that showed that R1b is firmly in Eastern Canada and stretches all over North America almost uniformally. Maybe that could be revisited, maybe we can find at least some R1b-L389* samples in Eastern Canada; granted we might find European R1 Clades due to settler assimilation. If this is true, we might find indigenous R1b in Eastern Canada.





https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Haplogroup_R_(Y-DNA).PNG

 

[LeBrok]

That's interesting if confirmed. Well there was an old R1b map that showed that R1b is firmly in Eastern Canada and stretches all over North America almost uniformally. Maybe that could be revisited, maybe we can find at least some R1b-L389* samples in Eastern Canada; granted we might find European R1 Clades due to settler assimilation. If this is true, we might find indigenous R1b in Eastern Canada.





https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Haplogroup_R_(Y-DNA).PNG

I have a suspition that R1b in natives of east coast was introduced by Vikings.

 

[Twilight]

I have a suspition that R1b in natives of east coast was introduced by Vikings.

Probably true but in order for that to work, the ydna needs to be either R1b-U106, R1a, I1 or a newly discovered subclade of R1b-L21; if the Vikings left behind some slaves.

 

[Tomenable]

http://themotherhouseofthegoddess.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Quote-Marija-Gimbutas.jpg

Neolithic fairies with farmer genes & magical powers repulsing horse-riding Indo-European invaders:

http://giphy.com/gifs/ixLoZvfG8vtNC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86dlgoeyYTI

 

[Rethel]

I have a suspition that R1b in natives of east coast was introduced by Vikings.

And Celts plus later french and british colonizers.
The highst density of R1 among Indians in around
Hudson Bay, so conclusion should be obvious.
It also can explain, why mt X is there, with similar
density among indians as R1.

 

[Rethel]

This quote was from Huitzilopochtli.

I allready gave you a refrence about it. You can;t say, that language is only 5000
years old, if you admire absolutly scientific authority, becasue lingusts are divided
on that matter (what simply suggest, that they have no idea, how old can be the
language, because they have no linguometer which can do this, and this is the sad
truth, which you cannot accept, becasue it would ruin your whole worldview, which
must be explained since the beginning to the end, even, if this has to be a fairy tail,
which is "current truth" until something new will be developed. It is exactly the same,
what did ancient chroniclers, who wanted to tell about unknown past.

What is actually moronic is to tie IE to R1 development of 20-40 kya.

Yes, every moronic, when all signs on the earth and sky
are showing, that R1 people where speakers of IE language.
But isn't moronic in your case to dream up baseless theories
which are falling one after another year by year...

By such measure you will claim soon that Adam and Eve spoke PIE.

Unfortunatly your knowlegde about them is very poor,
becasue they did not live in fictional eons in which you
belive, and languages emerged some 2000 years after
them. It is the time to do backlogs in basic literature.

 

[MarkoZ]

The only sample of basal R1b-L389* (and L389 is ancestral to M269) known so far, is from Puerto Rico. So according to your logic, R1b-L389 must have emerged 17,200 years ago (because this is how old L389 is) in America, and must have migrated to Eurasia on reed boats, ca. 16,800 years ago (TMRCA), where it later gave rise to R1b-P297 and ultimately to R1b-M269.

Really, looking at modern distributions is not such a good idea...

I've just seen this. Apparently you did not grasp the point I was trying to make at all, so this discussion will probably lead nowhere. But I feel compelled to address this amazing strawman.

Modern distributions are very informative if one carefully examines a lineage's internal hierarchy. A perfect example of this methodology can be found in Underhill's study of R1a, which should have put an end to the rampant fantasies about an origin in Eastern Europe or Siberia. The only scenario in which a Siberian origin for the haplotypes under R* would make sense would involve continuous migrations from the north in South Asia since the Paleolithic. Of course, this is completely silly since most migrations went into the opposite direction because population growth and technological advances took place in the south.

 

[MarkoZ]

I allready gave you a refrence about it. You can;t say, that language is only 5000
years old, if you admire absolutly scientific authority, becasue lingusts are divided
on that matter (what simply suggest, that they have no idea, how old can be the
language, because they have no linguometer which can do this, and this is the sad
truth, which you cannot accept, becasue it would ruin your whole worldview, which
must be explained since the beginning to the end, even, if this has to be a fairy tail,
which is "current truth" until something new will be developed. It is exactly the same,
what did ancient chroniclers, who wanted to tell about unknown past.



Yes, every moronic, when all signs on the earth and sky
are showing, that R1 people where speakers of IE language.
But isn't moronic in your case to dream up baseless theories
which are falling one after another year by year...



Unfortunatly your knowlegde about them is very poor,
becasue they did not live in fictional eons in which you
belive, and languages emerged some 2000 years after
them. It is the time to do backlogs in basic literature.

Really, instead of listening to those confused linguists and their convoluted theories, we should accept the propositions of a man who calls himself 'IndoeuR1opean'.

 

[Joey D]

I allready gave you a refrence about it. You can;t say, that language is only 5000
years old, if you admire absolutly scientific authority, becasue lingusts are divided
on that matter (what simply suggest, that they have no idea, how old can be the
language, because they have no linguometer which can do this, and this is the sad
truth, which you cannot accept, becasue it would ruin your whole worldview, which
must be explained since the beginning to the end, even, if this has to be a fairy tail

Sounds like a classic case of the tale wagging the dog.

 

[Huitzilopochtli]

I've just seen this. Apparently you did not grasp the point I was trying to make at all, so this discussion will probably lead nowhere. But I feel compelled to address this amazing strawman.

Modern distributions are very informative if one carefully examines a lineage's internal hierarchy. A perfect example of this methodology can be found in Underhill's study of R1a, which should have put an end to the rampant fantasies about an origin in Eastern Europe or Siberia. The only scenario in which a Siberian origin for the haplotypes under R* would make sense would involve continuous migrations from the north in South Asia since the Paleolithic. Of course, this is completely silly since most migrations went into the opposite direction because population growth and technological advances took place in the south.

It seems that Underhill's claim is that R1a diversified in Iran. If that is the case how did it get to Karelia? Why is the oldest R found in Siberia? Why are the closest relatives of R (Q, N, O) found in Siberia or East Asia? Aren't there significant level of ANE ancestry found in every population R is found? Didn't pottery move east to Russia from a Far East Asian home?

 

[Goga]

It seems that Underhill's claim is that R1a diversified in Iran. If that is the case how did it get to Karelia? Why is the oldest R found in Siberia? Why are the closest relatives of R (Q, N, O) found in Siberia or East Asia? Aren't there significant level of ANE ancestry found in every population R is found? Didn't pottery move east to Russia from a Far East Asian home?

The same way how Y-DNA hg. J1 get to Karelia. They found also very ancient J1 in Karelia. And as far as we know hg. Y-DNA J1 was not native to that area.

R1a could be part of the first farmers who migrated into the Steppes. At one point in history the Neolithic farmers invaded the Steppes from Iran.


It is possible that R* is from Siberia. But According to the established ( and peer reviewed ) academic world R1b* and R1a* are from the Iranian Plateau - Zagros Mountains..

 

[LeBrok]

It seems that Underhill's claim is that R1a diversified in Iran. If that is the case how did it get to Karelia? Why is the oldest R found in Siberia? Why are the closest relatives of R (Q, N, O) found in Siberia or East Asia? Aren't there significant level of ANE ancestry found in every population R is found? Didn't pottery move east to Russia from a Far East Asian home?

From first R1a in Iran to R1a found in Karelia at least 10,000 years passed. It is long enough time to walk around earth few times , not mentioning getting to Karelia which is 3,000 km away. Supposing they really diversified in Iran into R1a and R1b.

 

[Rethel]

we should accept the propositions of a man who calls himself 'IndoeuR1opean'.

It is a very relevant and important argument, really...

 

[MarkoZ]

It seems that Underhill's claim is that R1a diversified in Iran. If that is the case how did it get to Karelia? Why is the oldest R found in Siberia? Why are the closest relatives of R (Q, N, O) found in Siberia or East Asia? Aren't there significant level of ANE ancestry found in every population R is found? Didn't pottery move east to Russia from a Far East Asian home?

I can only echo the conclusions by Semenov in the following publication:

http://ejournal8.com/journals_n/1461227205.pdf

The Middle Eastern Zarzian culture is among the first to show unambiguous of dog domestication (the very first being the neighbouring Natufians). Even more importantly, due to their location the Zarzians were the first Eurasians to adopt the bow from Africa. It is hardly surprising therefore that this population experienced a period of auspicious expansion into several directions.

N* and O* aren't very related to R* at all. Besides Q, the closest relative would be paragroup P1*, which still has a significant distribution in insular South-East Asia.

As for the autosomal ANE component: the purported relationship with R is far from solid. We already have several ancient samples which show no traces of said component despite their R1b haplogroups. I think it should be obvious to anyone who has been paying attention that the Mal'ta boy had a highly diverse ancestry, with significant affinity to South-East Asia - the most likely origin of his Y-DNA.

Pottery most likely spread to far Eastern Europe from China or Japan. These movements are unlikely to have involved R haplotypes.

 

[johen]

http://ejournal8.com/journals_n/1461227205.pdf

author mentioned "sino-caucasian" language. Is there this kind of language group in the world? I always thought that Notratic is related with R, Q.

This approach could also work for positivecharacteristics as longevity. For example, in popular and scientific literature the peoples of HunzaBurushaskiand Abkhazians considered to contain higher percentage of long-living people thatmost other populations. Though this information is disputable and should be verified, it should bementioned, that both peoples belong to Sino-Caucasian language macrofamily and according to[11] the spread of the languages of that kind is associated with Y-DNA haplogroups Q and R.

It is known that the Chinese borrowed a number of words dealing with wheels and chariots from Indo-European sources. Archeology tells us that the art of making spoked wheels, and thus chariots light enough to be drawn by horses, was developed at the western end of Asia, around the southern Urals, in the third and early second millennia B.C. We do not know for certain that the mummy people used chariots, but given the known facts, it seems likely that they did, and that they transmitted this know-how to the Shan tribe of Chinese. There is no doubt that a sizable chunk of ancient Chinese vocabulary came from Indo-European—not only to do with chariotry, but also in architecture, divination, healing and other matters.

The Riddle of the White `Mummies' Of Ancient China,
By Dr. Alexander Jacob

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/33035-Classify-me-(Chinese-guy) (#5)

 

[gstq98]

Anatolia and the Armenian Highlands.

 

[Rethel]

Let make it simple as possible and sure: PPIE language started in
Akkad. It is at least recorded, and there is no need for guessing.

 

[Twilight]

Let make it simple as possible and sure: PPIE language started in
Akkad. It is at least recorded, and there is no need for guessing.

Im sorry but I'm a little confused. Wasn't the recorded Akkadian Language a branch of East Semitic Language? And Sumerian is a language isolate. Or is there another recorded language you have in mind? ^_^



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkadian



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_language

 

[Sile]

Let make it simple as possible and sure: PPIE language started in
Akkad. It is at least recorded, and there is no need for guessing.

Do you have a link?

Mitanni, Hurrian, Hatti are all from the first split of PIE around 4000BC...........all are non-Semitic languages.
You can throw into this mix, Luwian, Palaic, Hittite , Carian etc as also non-semitic languages

Basically all Anatolia as far south as modern Aleppo and as far east as the iranian border are all non-semitic ancient language group that split from the original PIE

Akkad script is 1500years younger than the old-Anatolian languages

 

[MOESAN]

Not an opinion, just a statement: there were a lot of proto-languages in so close regions; and where are the grammatical links with Finnic-ugric languages from? Why a so discrete language (at the beginning) took so much importance as to erase a majority of others spoken by well advanced cultures? NO answer, only question.
&: Hurrian is not PIE nor IE for I know. Mitanni is a kingdom, maybe not a single culture (linguistically speaking)