| Forum | Europe Travel Guide | Ecology | Facts & Trivia | Genetics | History | Linguistics |
| Austria | France | Germany | Ireland | Italy | Portugal | Spain | Switzerland |
 Eupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
|
You don't see the link between "izan" and "wizan"? When English people say "he is" HAHAHA I can not do anything for you. Hazard? You mean coincidence? By coincidence, are you HUMAN?
You are so upset that you cannot explain clearly your point of view. Are you telling us IE tongues waited IA to reach western Europe?Originally Posted by Gaska
The BB phenomenon is very curious and we cannot be sure its first promotors were IE's, here I can agree with you, without any certainty. But the massive male-biased Steppic genetic introgression into Europe is proved and preceeded IA by large.
I don't buy the Davdisky 's theory linking BB's and CWC at the origins, and t the same time, we are not sure todate that Y-R1b-DF27 was associated to first BB. What I'm almost sure is that DF27 as other P312 and close upstream R1b came from at least East-Central (north- or peri-Carpathian?) Europe if not directly from Steppes - see the L11 distribution in Eurpe. And for language, the link between northern (acculturated?) R1b BB's and some kind of proto-Ligurian-Celtic-Italic-... IEan languages seems the most evident with our todate knowledge.
In fact I see more witches than fairies in this thread.
Hey Guy-ke, take a look at those "coincidences" :
Euskara : Burbuillia
English : Bubble
French : Bulle
Euskara : Purpura
German : Purpur
English : Purple
Euskara : Jatorria
Magan : Hathor
Hebero :Torah
Karl Marx wanted to exterminate Basque people, is that a coincidence ?
the question is that in more than an IEan today language, the verb 'to be' forms appear as extracted from diverse roots, whatever the cause.
in Germanic derived languages we cannot associate forms like be/been to others like was/were/would or sein(zijn)< *sîn(?) (mayby the ones in is/ist could be linked to sein? very uncertain to me with my present knowledge)
in breton: boud/bezañ + other modes and times based upon bez- < bed- >< zo=so (welsh sy(dd)) >< on, out, eo, omp, oc'h, int (some of these indicative present forms are even used for the formation of complexes prepositons+personal pronouns!)
in Romance: French suis/sommes/sont + serai... and es/est + étais... >< fus/fut/fumes...
So, when an english speaker says is, he doesn't use a derived form of *wizan which gave, I guess, forms like was, were ASO, not is.
May I name it a 'berezina' or a 'waterloo' or a 'trafalgar' (for Frenchies)??? So sad... Please, learn methodology.
You have a lot of patience, Moesan. I've given up discussing linguistics with most people on this site because they haven't even taken a standard course on it.
Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci
True. Good advice. I give up for this thread.
You're really funny...
Breton "bezan" is the very SAME word as old english "wesan"... Seriously, what are you doing on this forum if you can't see the obvious? You're wasting my time, and you keep on destroying the research.
English "be" obviously come from the same root... ("to" is only a particle)
Whether it is linked to Basque "bizi" or "izan" does not change the fact that my guess is good, and you are much confused as ever.
French "es/est" and "suis" are just auxilliary variations, parrallel to "ser" and "estar" in spanish, the only difference is that french have simplified in one verb.
Basque have "egon" for "estar", linked to "egin" (to do), something which shows its unfeniable superiority to IE. Anyway, what's your point?
You have a zero level in linguistics, that is obvious, and your analysises of paleo-history and haplogroups are confused and laughable.
Your arrogance truly blinds you doesn’t it?
You are drawing conclusions and making assumptions for your pet theory with absolute denial and ignorance of etymology and linguistic science.
Upset? why would I be upset?
My point of view is very clear, the genetic continuity of R1b-P312/Df27 from the beginning of the BB culture to the Iron Age peoples in Iberia and southern France is enough proof to think that the BB culture did not speak an Indo-European language.
And I am also saying that the Indo-European languages (Celtic and Latin) entered Iberia in the Iron Age. Do you have any evidence that makes you think that they entered in the Chalcolithic or Bronze Age? If you have it, tell us what it is and we will be able to value it.
Massive male-biased Steppic genetic introgression into Europe is proved? REALLY?- The first R1b-M269 in Europe are in Bulgaria (Smyadovo-4.500 BC), and Spain (ATP3-Atapuerca-3.400 BC). Then you have 3 Neolithic farmers R1b-M269 in Switzerland buried in dolmens (2.730-2.620 BC), two of which have no autosomal steppe signal. You have VK531 in Norway R1b-P297 (2,400 BC) with no trace of steppe ancestry - for you this is a massive invasion of the steppes.... Let's imagine that you are right and that the origin of P312/Df27 is in the steppes, do you think that those lonely explorers buried in dolmens were able to change the language of western neolithic cultures?
We are not sure todate that Y-R1b-DF27 was associated to first BB- YES WE ARE
EHU002 (2.434 BC)-El Hundido-HapY-R1b-P312-Df 27-Mit-K1a4/a1-Positive-Marker-A12032
Position (hg19)-22901108- Position (hg38)-20739222-R-S24844/A12032-Ancestral Allele-C>T
R1bP312>ZZ11_1>DF27>ZZ12>Z2559>FGC4920>DF83>Z2563> Z2567>CTS9545>CTS6519>FGC67201>Y15926>A11786>A1202 0/Y23959-Marker [S24844] currently considered coincident with marker [A12020], using that phylogenetic tree.
*GBVPK (2.380 AC)- Grotte Basse de la Vigne Perdue-HapY-R1b1a/1b1a/1a2a/1-Z195-
These are the first two Df27 found in Europe. The first one buried in the entrance of a dolmen with Ciempozuelos style ceramics, and the second one buried in a cave with Pyrenean style ceramics (decorative motifs identical to Ciempozuelos). Have you found Df27 in Eastern Europe or the steppes?
Are you sure that DF27 as other P312 and close upstream R1b came from at least East-Central (north- or peri-Carpathian?) Europe if not directly from Steppes-To say that you need proof and to date the Harvardians who have been desperately searching for L51/L151/P310/P312 in the steppes for five years have not yet found it. We will have to wait for them to do so to accept the Kurgan theory as formulated by Haak, Reich and colleagues. For the time being, they are only fairy tales.
You see witches and I only see people who only have steppes in their brains as in so many other internet forums.
What does Marx have to do with the Basques? I don't understand what you mean.
Regarding the similarities between Basque or Proto-Basque with IE or PRE-IE, I'm not sure what you are getting at. It is very difficult to prove linguistic similarities between such ancient languages, there are many theories about it and linguists never agree. Genetics can help if the linguistic/archaeological and genetic results coincide.
Some Spanish linguists think that the Indo-European substrate is older in Iberia than Ibero/Basque. Others however, think the opposite, but genetics has taught us that Basques are very similar to Iron Age Iberians, and that Basques and Iberians (as well as most Spaniards) share male and female uniparental markers- That is enough proof to demonstrate the genetic and cultural continuity of Iberia until the arrival of the Romans.
Your contribution in this post deserves an answer. I have no time just now, but I 'll try to answer you. Concerning Steppes introgression proofs, I just notice it's illustrated by autosomes and this statement isn't directly linked to Y-haplo's even if some link exists by force. BTW how do you explain the sudden eruption of new Y-R1b subclades (not V88) in Iberia at Chalco-Bronze era? Where from? and Balkans are not western Europe! And first I-E languages in West were not by force under the form of evolvld Celtic and Italic groups. Read you again (I think)
@Gaska: I said I should give up for this thread. SO my answer will concern this post of yours, not the Basque-IE question here (I take a treatment to recover some health and confidence in myself, following a linguistics disease).
Autosomal composition is proof of what? r1b-M269 has its origin in the steppes?
Don't make me laugh, we have been listening for years to all kinds of Kurganists swearing that they found L51 in the steppes, that the Yamnaya nomads conquered mainland europe, took their women and imposed their language. And you know? the only thing they have found are three Swiss neolithic farmers buried in dolmens. Mass migration capable of changing the genetics and culture of western europe? Only in their dreams, they even had to force the models to make people believe that those Swiss gentlemen had a small percentage of steppe blood.
Regarding those new R1b subclades in Western Europe that appear in the Chalcolithic. It is clear that ATP3 is an Iberian farmer and its autosomal composition seems to have originated in the Balkans. Given that we have Smyadovo 4,500 BC belonging to the Gumelnita culture, I suppose that there were population movements from Eastern Europe during the whole Neolithic, and surely R1b-M269 participated in those migrations.
Of course the Balkans are in eastern Europe, also the Baltic countries are there, but all the R1b documented there are overwhelmingly WHGs and they could have migrated from central Europe to the East as did other male lineages (like R1b-V88) that are also older in the Balkans than in the steppes- I mean the problem is not Eastern Europe, but the obsession to link R1b-M269/L51 with the steppes. That is simply a big lie. Soon there will be published cases of R1b-M269 from Volosovo, and you know what? They don't have a drop of steppe blood, they are simply Whgs that reached the north of Russia.
It is therefore worth while to search out the bounds between opinion and knowledge; and examine by what measures, in things whereof we have no certain knowledge, we ought to regulate our assent and moderate our persuasion. (John Locke)
Never seen such a remarkable heap of absurdities. Isn't anyone going to kick out this t-roll?
I suppose you have sent all those models to try to prove the genetic relationship between Yamnaya-Samara and the BB culture. We can start by analyzing the samples belonging to the eastern domain of the Bb culture, i.e. Hungary.
You have sent 5 samples, 4 males and 1 female, all of them dated between 2350 and 2300 from different cemeteries.
wo males (I2787 I2786) have markers with Yamnaya culture origin i.e. Z2103 (I2787) and I2a2a (I2786), so it is not strange that they share a good percentage of their autosomal DNA with Yamnaya. Another male is R1b-L2 (I2365) has about 50% steppe blood. What you should do is check his mitochondrial lineage to find out his provenance, because it is clear that he is a BB of Czech origin. the fourth male is G2a2a, i.e. a descendant of Hungarian Neolithic farmers, who most likely acquired that steppe ancestry through exogamy-The 5th sample is a female with Mit Hap-I3a (I3529), which is a lineage that has been previously found in Progress Eneolithic (4,191 BC) and Lopatino (Sok River.Samara.2,775 BC). So it is not strange that this woman is genetically very similar to her steppe grandmothers.
What conclusions can we draw?
1-The migrations of the Yamnaya culture (Z2103, I2a) never passed the Tizsa river, but their descendants were incorporated to the Hungarian neolitic cultures from where they were integrated in the BB culture.
2- These percentages of Yamnaya ancestry do not prove a steppe origin of R1b-M269, first because in Switzerland there are much older cases of this lineage (2.750 BC) without steppe ancestry, and second because L51 has never been found in the Yamnaya culture.
3-The great majority of Hungarian BBs do not have steppe ancestry, I suppose that you have not modeled them or simply you have forgotten to incorporate them to the list that you have sent.
4-I suppose you know that women were also capable of transmitting this steppe ancestry, so you should not forget that exogamy was a common practice in the Neolithic and Chalcolithic.
Regarding Iberia, you have sent the sample of a female I6623, dated 1840 BC, which Olalde used to make other samples like I6588, look more steppe than they really were (He made groups with samples chosen to compensate percentages of ancestry, without taking into account the fact that they were absolutely anachronistic)- I guess you will agree with me that including such a modern sample in that list is simply an attempt to make the Bb culture more Yamnaya than it really was.
The great majority of the samples you have sent are very modern (2,250-2,200 BC). The BB culture began in 2.750 approx, and at that date, R1b-L51 has already been documented in Swiss neolithic dolmens. Then, I repeat, to prove that this lineage has origin in the steppes, not only you have to find it there to establish a clear genetic contiunity between the different cultures, but also the samples have to be old enough to be taken into consideration. otherwise, you are only sending very modern autosomal compositions that serve to understand how they spread throughout Europe, but not to link it to a particular lineage.
I2741-Szigetzentmiklós Felső Ürge (2.306 BC)-Grave 49
(1) Distance-1.875%
48.44-Iberia-Southwest-CA
28.91-Czech-MN
6.25-Baden-LCA
4.69-Tisza-LN
3.91-Wales-N
3.91-Glogular Amphora
3.12-Koros-Hg-14971
1.56-Ukraine-Eneolithic
This is a proof of the heterogeneity of the BB culture in Hungary, don't you think that if there had been invasions originating from the Yamnaya culture, that autosomal signal should be stronger the closer they are to that culture? How would you explain this situation?
L51 is downstream of L23, right?
RISE550 - mean date: 2985 BC - L23 - Peshany, Kalmykia, Samara
Aaf11 - mean date : 3050 BC - L23 - Afanasievo Altaï
I6711 - mean date : 2800 BC - L23 - Afanasievo Middle Yenissei
I1723 - mean date : 2752 BC - L23 - Goryachevodskiy 2, Yamnaya North Caucasus, Russia
I0443 - mean date : 3000 BC - L23 - Lopatino, Sok River, Samara
I6222 - mean date : 3117 BC - L51 - Bayankhongor, Afanasievo Mongolia
And what about L51's sister clade Z2103? Though it's been known to happen, brothers seldom get born 3000 kms apart.
I5884 - 2793 BC - Z2103 - Dereivka, Yamnaya Catacomb
RISE547 - 2761 BC - Z2103 - Temrta, Yamnaya Kalmykia
RISE555 - 2677 BC - Z2103 - Stalingrad quarry, Catacomb Poltavka
RISE786 - 2952 BC - Z2103 - Karagash, Yamnaya Karagash, Kazakhstan
By 3000 BC, L23 and subclades are all over the place in the Pontic steppe, the Ural-Volga, even places in the Siberian steppes. Did the Afanasievo guys travel all the way from western Europe to the Altaï?
Now, what L23, L51 or Z2103 samples do you have in western Europe around 3000 BC? What samples do you have upstream of that who could have fathered L23 and L51?
Unless L23 and its descendants fell from the moon, they came from the east. That they mixed to varying degrees with local farmers is now an accepted fact. You don't have to be a "kurganist" (whatever you intend to imply by that) to see the plain truth staring at you in the face.
Did the Afanasievo guys travel all the way from western Europe to the Altaï?
Sorry my friend but Dr. Reich's lab has qualified it as a contaminated sample, i.e. garbage, it is useless.
I6222 - mean date : 3117 BC - L51 - Bayankhongor, Afanasievo Mongolia
Mongolia_Chalcolithic_Afanasievo_1_contam R1b1a1b1a1 25 R .. .. [0.815,0.861] 0.042 .. 22 n/a (<200 SNPs) n/a (<200 SNPs) n/a (<200 SNPs) -0.039 0.056 Model_Misspecified [0,0.071] ds.half S6222.E1.L1 QUESTIONABLE_CRITICAL (damage.ds.half=0.042, mtcontam=[0.815,0.861])-They explain in ".anno file" that "half" means a damage retained at last position", "ds" is a double stranded library preparation, and damage for ds.half is "QUESTIONABLE_CRITICAL/FAIL" if the rating is <0.01, "QUESTIONABLE" for 0.01-0.03, and recorded but passed if 0.03-0.05.
About RISE 550
Sergey Malyshev- RISE550-two chromosome positions, 15080170 C/T and 18945942 C/T. One is BY3719 and the other is BY3718. BY3719 is under Z2103 (R1b-M269>L23>Z2103>R-M12149>R-PF331>R-FGC35095>BY3719
15080170 C>T- BY3718 hg19: 15080170 hg38: 12968260 C>T
18945942 C>T-BY3719 hg19: 18945942 hg38: 16834062 C>T
12968260,16834062-YF09887 R-BY3719 C>T
@Hrvclv said-"By 3000 BC, L23 and subclades are all over the place in the Pontic steppe, the Ural-Volga, even places in the Siberian steppes"
Only in your dreams, the only subclade of L23 that has been documented in the steppes is Z2103. L51 has never been found either in the steppes or in Mongolia. You can keep searching for centuries
@Hrvclv said-Now, what L23, L51 or Z2103 samples do you have in western Europe around 3000 BC?-What samples do you have upstream of that who could have fathered L23 and L51?
R1b-M269
Smyadovo-I2181/21-Burial 29 (4.545-4.450 AC)-4.497 AC-Mathieson 2.018-
ATP3 (3.389 AC)-EL Portalón, Atapuerca-Gunther, Valdiosera et al 2.015-Reich Lab-Harvard (2.021)-ATP3 5397 44 Spain_C.SG El Portalon Cave, Sierra de Atapuerca R1b1a1-R-M343>L754>L389>P297
R1b-L51-The oldest cases are in Switzerland MX310 and MX304 (2.735 BC)-No steppe ancestry
Fine... invalidating a specific sample doesn't invalidate the post as a whole. You're focusing on a detail to ignore the big picture and evade my questions: where in western Europe are the forefathers of the L23, L51, L151, P312, U106 (all of them high in steppe ancestry) that abruptly turn up between 2600 and 2400 BC all over Spain, France, Britain, Germany, Switzerland, Czechia, Hungary, northern Italy, etc... ?
Before them, R1b in western Europe is non-existent, save for one or two mesolithic wanderers. Suddenly, here they are, with half their genomes originating from Russia. Talk about spontaneous generation!
@Hrvclv said-"Unless L23 and its descendants fell from the moon, they came from the east. That they mixed to varying degrees with local farmers is now an accepted fact. You don't have to be a "kurganist" (whatever you intend to imply by that) to see the plain truth staring at you in the face"
I know the truth is painful, but R1b-M269/L51/P312 has not and will not be found on the steppes. Reich and his Harvardians have been making fools of themselves for 5 years, and the longer they take to rectify this, the more foolish they will be. Afterwards, many amateurs have believed his interpretation of Gimbutas' theory and have become believers of the new scientific dogma.
For them, as for you, it is difficult to accept that the only male lineages involved in Yamnaya culture migrations were Z2103, V1636 and I2a. And those migrations never reached Western Europe, nor did R1a-M417. Sooner or later you will end up accepting it. I'm sorry but your dreams of belonging to the great Yamnaya nomadic lineage have been just that, a nice fairy tale.
R1bM269/L51 from the east? Don`t make me laugh please. Maybe your P312 ancestors come from the moon or are Martians, but mine come from mainland europe.
R1b is a typical lineage of WHGs, Villabruna, Iboussieres, the Balkans and the Baltic countries were plagued by R1b-P297 (more than 70% WHGs). You have VK531 in Norway, P297 without steppe ancestry. I have already mentioned Smyadovo, ATP3 and Swiss neolithic farmers. You can ignore all that evidence as you seem to be doing, but you will never find M269 in the steppes. There are going to be published cases of that lineage in the Volosovo culture (around 3.000 BC) and you know what? they are totally WHgs. Time will tell who is right, for the moment the steppe theory is just a working hypothesis. Nothing more.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
