Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 101 to 104 of 104

Thread: My proposed tree of Indo-European languages

  1. #101
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    ToBeOrNotToBe's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-12-16
    Posts
    1,116


    Country: United Kingdom



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.


    Quote Originally Posted by Joey37 View Post
    I only associate the Z2103 tribes with the first stages of the expansion of proto-Indo-European. L51 is Bell Beaker and broadly Vasconic; their L23 ancestors went through Anatolia and into Europe while Z2103 headed through the Caucasus and into the Steppe, where they met the pre-Proto-Indo-European R1a-M417 and adopted their language, later taking it into Europe and Indo-Europeanizing their L51 cousins. The oldest R1b-Z2103 is from 5500 BC, a long enough time frame to allow this. This connects the Basque language to the Caucasian tongues and also allows a great deal of Basque survival, as their main clade, R1b-DF27, is descended from L51.
    Not that my opinion is important, but I agree. As a reminder for the doubters, check here to see the distribution of IE languages from around 2000 BC - does the distribution of Western IE remind you of any particular culture? Celtic languages developed in the Hallstatt culture, meaning they are an extremely late import into the British Isles. And the only known Indo-European language native to Iberia is that of the Lusitanian folk, which was also an extremely late import. It just doesn't add up that this was spread around Europe by the Beaker folk - not least in Britain, where there was basically a wipeout of the local population. A Corded Ware origin seems likely.

  2. #102
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,380
    Points
    37,785
    Level
    59
    Points: 37,785, Level: 59
    Level completed: 95%, Points required for next Level: 65
    Overall activity: 19.0%

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

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    I think since a long time in the tiny possibility of some Y-R1b L51/L11 not IE speakers (because of the Basque question) - NO certitude - but even if I take this vague hypothesis as valid I don't see myself as able to determine if as descendants it concerns only DF27 or others, like L21 - ATW I don't think the whole territory of BBs was under the control of the BBs prospectors spreaders of the "fashion" fine BB pottery and kit, and I don't think more that this prospectors-spreaders were the creators of the BB pottery style which I see born in Portugal among a not dominant population of early Chalco or pre-Chalco - could have been these BBs spreaders speakers of proto-Basque-Aquitan ??? I'm still puzzled. That said, we don't know when Lusitanian, Ligurian and W-Celtic were first spoken...

  3. #103
    Moderator Achievements:
    1 year registeredTagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Community Award

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,725
    Points
    26,601
    Level
    50
    Points: 26,601, Level: 50
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 949
    Overall activity: 5.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by ToBeOrNotToBe View Post
    Not that my opinion is important, but I agree. As a reminder for the doubters, check here to see the distribution of IE languages from around 2000 BC - does the distribution of Western IE remind you of any particular culture? Celtic languages developed in the Hallstatt culture, meaning they are an extremely late import into the British Isles. And the only known Indo-European language native to Iberia is that of the Lusitanian folk, which was also an extremely late import. It just doesn't add up that this was spread around Europe by the Beaker folk - not least in Britain, where there was basically a wipeout of the local population. A Corded Ware origin seems likely.
    How can someone make a map of the languages of Europe in 2000 BCE when there was no writing at all in Europe at that time, probably not even in Greece/Crete? It's all speculation based on very incomplete knowledge, so we can't really take any conclusions from it. The map is a bit strange in that it assumes that the proto-languages of each of the IE subfamilies were already settled in or very near to the places their descendant languages were spoken in Late Antiquity. I don't think that's a given.

    Indo-European languages could have been spoken all over, and we'll never know, we can only make educated guesses based on archaeology and genetics. We cannot just presume that the languages we found for example in Britain, Ireland and Iberia by the Roman Late Republic times (the earliest we can talk with any confidence about the linguistic makeup of Western Europe) were the first IE languages spoken there, or even the first languages, period. It's as if we had no written documentation about pre-Roman Iberia and we just assumed that Latin was the first wave of Indo-Europeanization in that region. I am absolutely confident that several IE languages and even entire branches went extinct due to the massive expansions of Hallstatt, La Tène and later Rome, Germanic and Slavic tribes - without leaving a single trace of them. We only know more about languages spoken around the Mediterranean. The fact that Lusitanian was clearly not Celtic and in some ways more Italic than Celtic already demonstrates to us that there were at least 3 waves of IE languages still spoken in Iberia by ~1 AD (that's more than 2000 years of possible linguistic replacements since Bell Beaker): a Proto-Italo-Celtic that would become Lusitanian; a Celtic that would become Celtiberian; and a Latin that would become Iberian Romance languages.

  4. #104
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,380
    Points
    37,785
    Level
    59
    Points: 37,785, Level: 59
    Level completed: 95%, Points required for next Level: 65
    Overall activity: 19.0%

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

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Funny about making of trees:
    -Bernard Sergent (compiling others thoughts relatively recent) thinks archaic "Northwestern Old-Europeish" is not an early indifferenciated IE but rather a kind of "proto-Indo-Iranian"! Curiously he evocates Rhaetian as possibly related to it, but I don't know what kind of Rhaetian he is speaking about here.
    -B.S. thinks also that genuine Illyrian did not go far farther north than today Albania, and could be considered as a dialect of a language which gave birth too to Mesapian and Albanian. At a bigger scale it was part of a group of Balkanic languages like Thracian, Dacian an others, rather satemised. The traits shared with Germanic could be linked to the supposed proximity (for a while) of proto-Germanics (already IE-ised) with people close to Illyrians at Lusatian times, if we rely on Henri Hubert, but all this is speculation.
    the I-Ian hypothesis for "old west europeish" is interesting; we have one of the Saami Finnic substrata supposed to be an early partly satemised IE language - we have the CWC's who maybe could have spoken this old partly satemized language (look at their distribution in Norway where they seems having been pushed northwards by true Germanics)- we have Germanics which shows more grammatical and lexical ties with Baltic than with Celtic and even with Italic (closer to it than Celtic, in fact) - the supposed Indo-Iranian link could it reflect an old stage of proto-Satem dialects, the IEans of the North? It's discussed in Eurogenes : apparently the ties between Balto-Slavic and I-Ian are ancient and not the result of recent convergences. I personally think that the center of palatalization, motor of satemisation, is in Center and Eastern Europe, not farther North or South, and a continuum existed between Balto-Slavic, Thracian/Dacian & Cy and Indo-Iranian without to speak of lost dialects.
    Only bits here. But I think the tree system doesn' exclude partial osmosis between neighbouring languages, and loans. Germanic language has a complicated making: not-IEan + contacts with a rather Satem language before true IEisation from some pan-Italic or Celto-Italic + contacts/ with Baltic and Central Europe (pseudo-"Illyrian"? with some "etruscan-like" tendancies?)
    I think today languages forms can mistake us about their ancient proximities; at ancient stages IE dialects were closer one together and could easier exchange with others and modify themselves. There could be some porosity even between our "families".
    Grammar and lexicon and phonetic can give us very different feelings about closeness.
    &: contrary to what Sile said all the languages in Europe did not undergo a systematic palatalisation for their velars before front vowels.
    &: Celtic seems older than Hallstatt and modern Greek is an adopted IE language by non IE folks and some others who were West-Anatolian IE speakers. ATW it underwent serious phonetical modifs.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

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
  •