Map of Indo-European Languages (by Phonology)

[Cyrus]

I created this map by considering phonological differences between Indo-European languages and the possible paths of migrations based on the Anatolian hypothesis of Proto-Indo-European origin.

Original size: http://www.allempires.com/Uploads/IE_Map.jpg

 

[halfalp]

I like the style of the map, but the distribution of Kentum Languages make not anymore sense.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

I created this map by considering phonological differences between Indo-European languages and the possible paths of migrations based on the Anatolian hypothesis of Proto-Indo-European origin.

Original size: http://www.allempires.com/Uploads/IE_Map.jpg

Traditional Anatolian hypothesis is straight up impossible, the farmer types were not IE in any sense of the word. Any IE hypothesis has to involve the Steppe too (Satem languages almost definitely originated there), regardless of what you think of the Centum languages (I think, bar Anatolian, all IE languages are too similar to have originated anywhere else but on the Steppe (but not L51 on the Steppe)).

I'm curious though, what made you place proto-Germanic where it is - it doesn't seem to make much sense...

 

[Cyrus]

I like the style of the map, but the distribution of Kentum Languages make not anymore sense.

Why? Please explain. Most of IE languages in Western Europe and Middle East were Centum.

 

[Cyrus]

Traditional Anatolian hypothesis is straight up impossible, the farmer types were not IE in any sense of the word. Any IE hypothesis has to involve the Steppe too (Satem languages almost definitely originated there), regardless of what you think of the Centum languages (I think, bar Anatolian, all IE languages are too similar to have originated anywhere else but on the Steppe (but not L51 on the Steppe)).

I'm curious though, what made you place proto-Germanic where it is - it doesn't seem to make much sense...

Steppe hypothesis dates back to the 19th century but modern scholars mostly believe in the Anatolian hypothesis: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/...originated-in-anatolia-analysis-suggests.html

There are several evidences which show proto-Germanic originated in the west of modern Iran, one of them is phonological evidences and my map is based on it. Among all Indo-European languages, we see the process of spirantization and the appearance of non-sibilant fricatives (x,θ,ɣ,f, ...) in just Germanic and Iranian languages, and this process would be impossible, if these sounds didn't exist in the language of aboriginal people.

 

[Pax Augusta]

Steppe hypothesis dates back to the 19th century but modern scholars mostly believe in the Anatolian hypothesis: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/...originated-in-anatolia-analysis-suggests.html

Do you have a better source than a 2012 article by Nicholas Wade?

 

[Cyrus]

Do you have a better source than a 2012 article by Nicholas Wade?

If you read the article then you can find the source: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/337/6097/957

Authors:

• Remco Bouckaert¹,
• Philippe Lemey²,
• Michael Dunn³,⁴,
• Simon J. Greenhill⁵,⁶,
• Alexander V. Alekseyenko⁷,
• Alexei J. Drummond¹,⁸,
• Russell D. Gray⁵,⁹,
• Marc A. Suchard¹⁰,¹¹,¹²,
• Quentin D. Atkinson⁵,¹³,*

• ¹Department of Computer Science, University of Auckland, Auckland 1142, New Zealand.
• ²Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Rega Institute, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
  
• ³Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Post Office Box 310, 6500 AH Nijmegen, Netherlands.
• ⁴Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, Kapittelweg 29, 6525 EN Nijmegen, Netherlands.
• ⁵Department of Psychology, University of Auckland, Auckland 1142, New Zealand.
• ⁶School of Culture, History & Language and College of Asia & the Pacific, Australian National University, 0200 Canberra, ACT, Australia.
  
• ⁷Center for Health Informatics and Bioinformatics, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA.
• ⁸Allan Wilson Centre for Molecular Ecology and Evolution, University of Auckland, Auckland 1142, New Zealand.
• ⁹Department of Philosophy, Research School of the Social Sciences, Australian National University, 0200 Canberra, ACT, Australia.
  
• ¹⁰Department of Biomathematics, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
• ¹¹Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
• ¹²Department of Human Genetics, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
• ¹³Institute of Cognitive and Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6PN, UK.

 

[halfalp]

Steppe hypothesis dates back to the 19th century but modern scholars mostly believe in the Anatolian hypothesis: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/...originated-in-anatolia-analysis-suggests.html

There are several evidences which show proto-Germanic originated in the west of modern Iran, one of them is phonological evidences and my map is based on it. Among all Indo-European languages, we see the process of spirantization and the appearance of non-sibilant fricatives (x,θ,ɣ,f, ...) in just Germanic and Iranian languages, and this process would be impossible, if these sounds didn't exist in the language of aboriginal people.

Why Iran if part of Proto-Germanic and Proto-Indo-Iranian neighbored in Eastern Europe with the CWC? Is there any particular reason to make the link in Western Iran, a part that you are yourself Iranian?

 

[Cyrus]

Why Iran if part of Proto-Germanic and Proto-Indo-Iranian neighbored in Eastern Europe with the CWC? Is there any particular reason to make the link in Western Iran, a part that you are yourself Iranian?

Germanic culture is actually one of the youngest cultures in Europe, proto-Indo-Iranian dates back to 3rd millennium BC, almost 2,000 years before the first evidences of Germanic culture in Europe, so they couldn't be neighbors.

As I said there are several evidences which show Germanic people originally lived in the west of Iran (also north of Iraq and southwest of Turkey), then they migrated to Eastern Europe and finally Northern Europe, I can talk about all of them, especially linguistic, archaeological and cultural evidences, if you want.

I found this map in Eupedia:

 

[Sile]

I created this map by considering phonological differences between Indo-European languages and the possible paths of migrations based on the Anatolian hypothesis of Proto-Indo-European origin.

Original size: http://www.allempires.com/Uploads/IE_Map.jpg

what is the age period of the map...because Persians arrived in modern Iran from Uzbek lands circa 1000BC
Persians, are separated from the other Iranians around 1000 BC. Their closest relatives were the Medes, and both came from the Saka peoples in the central Asian steppe. The Medes and Persians first entered Iran from the Uzbekistan area around 1000 BC. They settled in the central Iranian plateau, mixing with the Scythian and Kassite migrants who preceded them, as well as with the Elamitic natives. The Persians moved to present-day Fars around 700 BC.
The Persians brought with them Zoroastrian religion

 

[halfalp]

Germanic culture is actually one of the youngest cultures in Europe, proto-Indo-Iranian dates back to 3rd millennium BC, almost 2,000 years before the first evidences of Germanic culture in Europe, so they couldn't be neighbors.

As I said there are several evidences which show Germanic people originally lived in the west of Iran (also north of Iraq and southwest of Turkey), then they migrated to Eastern Europe and finally Northern Europe, I can talk about all of them, especially linguistic, archaeological and cultural evidences, if you want.

I found this map in Eupedia:

I'm talking about an IE dialecte, not about Germanic People.

 

[Ygorcs]

Steppe hypothesis dates back to the 19th century but modern scholars mostly believe in the Anatolian hypothesis: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/...originated-in-anatolia-analysis-suggests.html

That's just not true at all. It's not my opinion, but an objective fact: the Anatolian hypothesis has been severely weakened by the development of paleogenomics and the latest developments of linguistics and it's in fact becoming increasingly a fringe theory. The "PIE outside of Europe" hypothesis that has gained more currency lately is the South Caucasus/Armenian hypothesis, not the Anatolian at all - and even that is still widely rejected by most scholars, especially linguists.

 

[Ygorcs]

Germanic culture is actually one of the youngest cultures in Europe, proto-Indo-Iranian dates back to 3rd millennium BC, almost 2,000 years before the first evidences of Germanic culture in Europe, so they couldn't be neighbors.
As I said there are several evidences which show Germanic people originally lived in the west of Iran (also north of Iraq and southwest of Turkey), then they migrated to Eastern Europe and finally Northern Europe, I can talk about all of them, especially linguistic, archaeological and cultural evidences, if you want.

No, that's a mistake. It is not that Germanic people and culture are young, it's actually by definition as late as any other as it's the result of continuous developments since PIE was still spoken just like Indo-Iranian or any other linguistic group descended from PIE. There is no such a thing as "younger language" or "younger culture". Germanic is young only in the sense that the latest common language of all Germanic speakers nowadays was still spoken 2,000 years ago, while that of Indo-Iranians was spoken much earlier. This is like Latin, which is the common mother language of all Romance languages, but was part of a much larger and older Italic branch. But of course Proto-Germanic came from some older language and was spoken continuously in earlier forms since it was still basically a dialect of PIE. We just do not know it because it was not written. The Common Germanic language and culture derived from earlier languages and cultures, and it's possible to trace it back to at least the Nordic Bronze Age.

Therefore, there is no reason at all to doubt that Pre-Proto-Germanic and Proto-Indo-Iranian could never have been spoken relatively close to each other. In fact, their mutual contacts must've been really minor because Balto-Slavic show much more isoglosses with Indo-Iranian than Germanic does. Considering all the genetic and archaeological data we have, it makes much more sense that simply Pre-Proto-Germanic was spoken in Northern Europe when Proto-Indo-Iranian was developing in the Pontic-Caspian steppe (Eastern Europe), where it probably began and whence it started to expand southward via Central Asia. Genetically it makes no sense, especially considering ancient DNA, that Germanic North Europeans owe much or even a part of their ancestry to populations from West Iran.

The map of haplogroup I has very little to do with the matter at stake here. I as a whole is more than 20,000 years old and certainly not related only to Proto-Germanic or even Pre-Proto-Germanic. Actually the territorial reach of Germanic correlates much better with another entirely different haplogroup, R1b, more specifically R1b-U106.

 

[Pax Augusta]

If you read the article then you can find the source: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/337/6097/957

Thanks, I'll read it.

Germanic culture is actually one of the youngest cultures in Europe, proto-Indo-Iranian dates back to 3rd millennium BC, almost 2,000 years before the first evidences of Germanic culture in Europe, so they couldn't be neighbors.
As I said there are several evidences which show Germanic people originally lived in the west of Iran (also north of Iraq and southwest of Turkey), then they migrated to Eastern Europe and finally Northern Europe, I can talk about all of them, especially linguistic, archaeological and cultural evidences, if you want.
I found this map in Eupedia:

This map includes all the subclades of I, only specific subclades are considered Germanic.

 

[Cyrus]

No, that's a mistake. It is not that Germanic people and culture are young, it's actually by definition as late as any other as it's the result of continuous developments since PIE was still spoken just like Indo-Iranian or any other linguistic group descended from PIE. There is no such a thing as "younger language" or "younger culture". Germanic is young only in the sense that the latest common language of all Germanic speakers nowadays was still spoken 2,000 years ago, while that of Indo-Iranians was spoken much earlier. This is like Latin, which is the common mother language of all Romance languages, but was part of a much larger and older Italic branch. But of course Proto-Germanic came from some older language and was spoken continuously in earlier forms since it was still basically a dialect of PIE. We just do not know it because it was not written. The Common Germanic language and culture derived from earlier languages and cultures, and it's possible to trace it back to at least the Nordic Bronze Age.

Therefore, there is no reason at all to doubt that Pre-Proto-Germanic and Proto-Indo-Iranian could never have been spoken relatively close to each other. In fact, their mutual contacts must've been really minor because Balto-Slavic show much more isoglosses with Indo-Iranian than Germanic does. Considering all the genetic and archaeological data we have, it makes much more sense that simply Pre-Proto-Germanic was spoken in Northern Europe when Proto-Indo-Iranian was developing in the Pontic-Caspian steppe (Eastern Europe), where it probably began and whence it started to expand southward via Central Asia. Genetically it makes no sense, especially considering ancient DNA, that Germanic North Europeans owe much or even a part of their ancestry to populations from West Iran.

The map of haplogroup I has very little to do with the matter at stake here. I as a whole is more than 20,000 years old and certainly not related only to Proto-Germanic or even Pre-Proto-Germanic. Actually the territorial reach of Germanic correlates much better with another entirely different haplogroup, R1b, more specifically R1b-U106.

There is absolutely no evidence that the Germanic culture existed in the Nordic Bronze Age, of course Germanic language is a direct descendent of proto-Indo-European and couldn't be younger than Indo-Iranian and other original IE languages but in Europe it can be considered as one of the youngest languages.

There is a big difference between what historical evidences show and what nationalists say, for example some Iranian nationalists say that Persians lived in the same land in the east of Elam from at least the 3rd millennium BC and they were the same people who were called Parhasi in the ancient Mesopotamian sources, should we believe it?

If Germanic originated in the north of Europe, please mention just one loanword from other languages in this region with Germanic sound shifts. Theo Vennemann has listed hundreds Germanic loanwords from Semitic languages, there are even many loanwords from Sumerian, like proto-Germanic *xanap- "hemp" from Sumerian kunibu with regular Germanic sound shifts: k>x & b>p.

 

[halfalp]

There is absolutely no evidence that the Germanic culture existed in the Nordic Bronze Age, of course Germanic language is a direct descendent of proto-Indo-European and couldn't be younger than Indo-Iranian and other original IE languages but in Europe it can be considered as one of the youngest languages.

There is a big difference between what historical evidences show and what nationalists say, for example some Iranian nationalists say that Persians lived in the same land in the east of Elam from at least the 3rd millennium BC and they were the same people who were called Parhasi in the ancient Mesopotamian sources, should we believe it?

If Germanic originated in the north of Europe, please mention just one loanword from other languages in this region with Germanic sound shifts. Theo Vennemann has listed hundreds Germanic loanwords from Semitic languages, there are even many loanwords from Sumerian, like proto-Germanic *xanap- "hemp" from Sumerian kunibu with regular Germanic sound shifts: k>x & b>p.

Theo Venneman is the guy who said that Semitic and Celtic Languages were sister languages.

 

[Sile]

Theo Venneman is the guy who said that Semitic and Celtic Languages were sister languages.

what we know

Semetic languages began 2500BC
First split of PIE language occurred in Anatolia circa 4000BC
.
When was celtic suppose to have formed or are you also referring to Gaulish languages as celtic ?

 

[Ygorcs]

There is absolutely no evidence that the Germanic culture existed in the Nordic Bronze Age, of course Germanic language is a direct descendent of proto-Indo-European and couldn't be younger than Indo-Iranian and other original IE languages but in Europe it can be considered as one of the youngest languages.

There is a big difference between what historical evidences show and what nationalists say, for example some Iranian nationalists say that Persians lived in the same land in the east of Elam from at least the 3rd millennium BC and they were the same people who were called Parhasi in the ancient Mesopotamian sources, should we believe it?

If Germanic originated in the north of Europe, please mention just one loanword from other languages in this region with Germanic sound shifts. Theo Vennemann has listed hundreds Germanic loanwords from Semitic languages, there are even many loanwords from Sumerian, like proto-Germanic *xanap- "hemp" from Sumerian kunibu with regular Germanic sound shifts: k>x & b>p.

AFAIK Vennemann considered that Celtic languages were the ones deeply influenced by Semitic languages, and in fact he assumed that Semitic or a closely related Afro-Asiatic branch was spoken in Neolithic Europe and was replaced by Indo-European languages that would later give birth to Proto-Celtic. Not Germanic. Semitic loanwords in Germanic should not come as a surprise especially considering specialized words for objects that can be traded (e.g. hemp), as it is well known that IE languages and even PIE itself had MANY loanwords from Semitic languages and even from Sumerian, though they may have borrowed them indirectly via intermediary languages. That shouldn't come as a surprise when the Near Eastern civilizations were absolutely dominant in the Bronze Age and the ancestors of Proto-Germanic speakers most probably lived in Eastern or Southeastern Europe, reachable from Semitic sea and land trade routes. It is not just Germanic that has Semitic loanwords. The very example you gave *xanap- is also cognate to Greekkannabis, and it seems clear that it's just a cultural Wanderwort like computer and television in many languages nowadays.

As for evidence of the presence of Germanic in the north of Europe, the fact that its lexicon and syntax are much closer to Italic and Celtic than to Indo-Iranian, Armenian or other Near Eastern IE branches, as well as the fact that Uralic languages are full of Germanic loanwords (many of them archaic enough to be assumed to date to before the late Common Germanic/Proto-Germanic period) do attest the presence of Germanic in Northern Europe from a fairly early period.

Also, it is not just that there are evidences of Pre-Proto-Germanic in Northern Europe, it is also that there is just no strong archaeological and far less genetic evidence of any large migration from West Iran to Northern Europe and more specifically Scandinavia (where a late form of Proto-Germanic is really first attested) during the Iron Age to account for a supposed transformation from a previous IE branch to an "Iranian" Proto-Germanic. It is extremely unlikely that the partial ancestors of Germanic people would've lived for milennia in West Iran, yet they would've managed to remain very Bronze Age Steppe-like instead of mixing with the locals and acquiring much more Iranian Farmer, Levantine Farmer and Anatolian Farmer admixtures, changing their genetic makeup and therefore imparting a much more Near Eastern-like genetic impact to Northern Europe. Quite on the contrary, the Indo-European population of Northern Europe and Scandinavia in particular is the one that genetically looks more "Yamnaya-like" nowadays, with less heavy admixture with elements besides the usual EHG+CHG mix of the Bronze Age steppe. This would've been virtually impossible if they had come from the mixed Iranian+Levantine+Anatolian+Caucasian genetic landscape of Iran. They would've certainly brought Northern Europe closer to Southeastern European and especially to Near Eastern populations, whereas in fact Northern Europeans from Germanic countries are probably those most distant from Near Eastern peoples in PCA Charts, precisely because they missed much of the additional flows of Caucasian and Anatolian-like ancestry into Europe.

 

[Cyrus]

This map includes all the subclades of I, only specific subclades are considered Germanic.

The Germanic one is I1 which dates back to almost 3,000 years ago.

 

[Cyrus]

Theo Venneman is the guy who said that Semitic and Celtic Languages were sister languages.

This is a historical fact that in the first millennium BC Celtic people lived in Galatia in the north of Semitic lands, and as I mentioned in this thread: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/37188-Discovery-of-Statue-Menhirs-Celtic-Migrations archeological evidences show that they even lived in more eastern lands in the southwest of Caspian sea in 2nd millennium BC.