Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 51

Thread: Proto-Indo-european languague : R1a or R1b ?

  1. #26
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran10000 Experience Points
    zanipolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    22-03-11
    Posts
    2,073
    Points
    22,792
    Level
    46
    Points: 22,792, Level: 46
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 758
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - Z19945
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1a4o

    Ethnic group
    Down Under
    Country: Australia





    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    There is just so many wrong things about PIE coming from South Caucasus in Maykop times. Most of the lineages found in Maykop, G2a1 and L2 are nowadays markers of Caucasus peoples with their Caucasian languages. So either, PIE came earlier ( where is Olympus Mons? ) or either PIE came from Steppe but was highly influenced by the languages brought by Maykop migrants, wich a part Vocabulary dont make sense.
    Do you believe Haplogroup R ...............or was it G ( or another haplogroup ) brought the language into Europe
    Father's Mtdna H95a1
    Grandfather Mtdna T2b24
    Great Grandfather Mtdna T1a1e
    GMother paternal side YDna R1b-S8172
    Mother's YDna R1a-Z282

  2. #27
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842
    Points
    10,677
    Level
    31
    Points: 10,677, Level: 31
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 573
    Overall activity: 76.0%


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    So you dont count Balkans_Iron Gates or Baltic HG's? Or even Don-Donets? There was more than 300'000 HG's in Mesolithic Europe for what i've read recently. If PIE was just a dialect from a multi-linguistic province, it's mathematically impossible to know where it evolved. More, we dont understand that much the genetic of languages, any attempt like glottochronology to fix an age or a virtual place of origin seems wrong.
    Baltic HGs were admixed Franco-Cantabrians, Iron Gates were Aegeans.

  3. #28
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,209
    Points
    40,464
    Level
    62
    Points: 40,464, Level: 62
    Level completed: 9%, Points required for next Level: 1,186
    Overall activity: 31.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    Baltic HGs were admixed Franco-Cantabrians, Iron Gates were Aegeans.
    almost agree if we consider the steppe hypothesis
    ΟΘΕΝ ΑΙΔΩΣ OY EINAI
    ΑΤΗ ΛΑΜΒΑΝΕΙΝ ΑΥΤΟΙΣ
    ΥΒΡΙΣ ΓΕΝΝΑΤΑΙ
    ΝΕΜΕΣΙΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΙΣΗ ΑΚΟΛΟΥΘΟΥΣΙ ΔΕ

    When there is no shame
    Divine blindness conquers them
    Hybris (abuse, opprombium) is born
    Nemesis and punishment follows.

    Εχε υπομονη Ηρωα
    Η τιμωρια δεν αργει.

  4. #29
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,400
    Points
    6,604
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,604, Level: 24
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 446
    Overall activity: 10.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    Baltic HGs were admixed Franco-Cantabrians, Iron Gates were Aegeans.
    How so? They had both the same ratio almost of WHG-EHG.

  5. #30
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,400
    Points
    6,604
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,604, Level: 24
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 446
    Overall activity: 10.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by zanipolo View Post
    Do you believe Haplogroup R ...............or was it G ( or another haplogroup ) brought the language into Europe
    I do believe Yamnaya Culture or Post-Yamnaya Cultures brought IE languages to the rest of the world and they were y-dna R.

  6. #31
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,400
    Points
    6,604
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,604, Level: 24
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 446
    Overall activity: 10.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    But if not a Steppe-continuity, my other hypothesis for PIE core would be Funnelbeaker-Globular Amphora.

  7. #32
    Banned Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    545
    Points
    1,481
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,481, Level: 10
    Level completed: 66%, Points required for next Level: 69
    Overall activity: 99.0%


    Country: Iran



    I posted "Map of Indo-European Languages (by Phonology)" in this thread: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...(by-Phonology)

    Indo-European is divided into two major groups: Centum and Satem, Centum relates to haplogroup R1b and Satem to R1a, I think the original Indo-Europeans had haplogroup R1b and lived in Anatolia, a group of them who migrated to north Eurosia (probably modern Bashkortostan in Russia) spread this language among people who had haplogroup R1a.


  8. #33
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    22-04-19
    Posts
    55
    Points
    1,010
    Level
    8
    Points: 1,010, Level: 8
    Level completed: 30%, Points required for next Level: 140
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Quentin View Post
    R1a [-M417] (the most important lineage today - about 99% of the R1a) and R1b [-P297] (idem) "found themselves", thousand years after in the Pontic Step, circa 8000 years ago, or maybe they crossed the Caucasus together to install themselves in this new area.
    looking at the data we have now, i would say that R1a came from Siberia dierectly into Eastern Europe during the mesolithic, around 8000 bc or earlier, and R1b-p297 came much later, during the early Chalcolitic, around 3000 bc or earlier. some theoretize that it passed through Cetral Asia, northern Iran, Caucasus to come to the Ukrainian steppe and start the Yamnaya culture. Somebody correct me if i'm wrong.

    And as you said, when R1b came they probably took the women from the local population and their language changed.. and Corded ware were a R1a population which copied the R1b Yamnaya, adopted the pastoralist way of life from them, and possibly borrowed a lot of their vocabulary, thus both their lanuages grew more similar over time

  9. #34
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Most Popular

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,727
    Points
    26,994
    Level
    50
    Points: 26,994, Level: 50
    Level completed: 45%, Points required for next Level: 556
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    In my opinion, PIE was related to both R1a-M417 and R1b-L23. Why not? There are not many populations whose males belong exclusively to one haplogroup, far less if they are belong to a sucessful culture and language group that managed to have a large territory. Let me explain: Proto-Indo-European means strictly the last common stage of the language that gave birth to all known Indo-European languages. It's not pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-PIE, it's PIE, the language that was spoken just before it split into dialects that were distinct enough from each other that they could be considered different even if closely related languages. That must've involved a speech community in the Copper Age, around 4500-3500 B.C. (more probably on the lower end of this period). By that time I think it's very likely that a sociocultural and linguistic milieu that arose from the Khvalynsk expansion (probably with a lot of influence from Eneolithic Piedmont Steppe people, just north of the Caucasus) and the Suvorovo-Novodanilovka offshoot that brought some prestige culture and social order associated with it to the westernmost parts of the steppe and even the Balkans.

    I think Early PIE spread pretty much like Turkic, with a demographic boom of a specific people but also with the absorption of many neighboring populations that might have spoken Para-PIE (sister languages to PIE, easily assimilated by it) or even non-IE languages. Then the strong clannish, patrilineal and patriarchal nature of the society cared to establish several local founder events and through genetic drift diverse PIE-speaking groups, with different prevalent Y-DNA lineages, appeared and expanded in different ways and directions.

    The strong evidences that both R1b-L23-majority Yamnaya and R1a-M417-majority CWC had a lot to do with the spread of IE languages leads me to believe that PIE had become the lingua franca and later the common language of the Pontic-Caspian macro-culture since the Chalcolithic and then it expanded in association with distinct lineages, which probably included other haplogroups, not even just R1b and R1a.

    Now what lineage was more closely associated wih the pre-PIE or pre-pre-PIE population? Honestly I think we'll never know, but I'd bet on R1b.
    Last edited by Ygorcs; 03-05-19 at 11:23.

  10. #35
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Most Popular

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,727
    Points
    26,994
    Level
    50
    Points: 26,994, Level: 50
    Level completed: 45%, Points required for next Level: 556
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    I posted "Map of Indo-European Languages (by Phonology)" in this thread: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...(by-Phonology)

    Indo-European is divided into two major groups: Centum and Satem, Centum relates to haplogroup R1b and Satem to R1a, I think the original Indo-Europeans had haplogroup R1b and lived in Anatolia, a group of them who migrated to north Eurosia (probably modern Bashkortostan in Russia) spread this language among people who had haplogroup R1a.

    The centum vs. satem distintion is overestimated, and in fact many mainstream linguists nowadays don't take it too much in consideration. There are centum IE branches that are clearly more connected to some satem IE branches than to other centum branches. It's just one set of phonological trends among many other phonological trends and, of course, the even more important issues of syntax and morphology (lexicon also matters, of course). For instance, it's clear that centum Greek is more closely related to satem Indo-Iranian than to centum Anatolian in the way the language functions. There's nothing to suggest that "centum IE" and "satem IE" form two distinct phylogenetic branches of PIE and that they split from each other at an early stage.

    The satem changes actually seem to have been a somewhat later innovation that only caught on in part of the IE speech community (in my opinion, it's strongly associated with the CWC-derived people). And there are branches that do not fit completely either as centum or as satem (such as Albanian), which demonstrates that the simplistic centum vs. satem division doesn't work very well as a hypothesis of two primordial IE languages/dialect continua spoken apart from each other. Instead what seems to have happened is a dialect continuum of IE dialects/languages, some of which were influenced by centum trends and some others by satem trends, and some others were somewhere in the middle of these.

  11. #36
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Most Popular

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,727
    Points
    26,994
    Level
    50
    Points: 26,994, Level: 50
    Level completed: 45%, Points required for next Level: 556
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by Quentin View Post
    Hello everybody,
    first, excuse me for my unperfect english, but I will do my best to be understood

    I have a problem with the so-evident link between Indo-european languages and R1a et R1b paternity

    Let me sum up the known fact


    1/ R1a and R1b splitted about 15.000 or 20.000 years ago, maybe in Central Asia (Altaï or Persia ?)
    I can't imagine the R* people had a common language at this time, who would survived more than 10.000 years...

    2/ R1a [-M417] (the most important lineage today - about 99% of the R1a) and R1b [-P297] (idem) "found themselves", thousand years after in the Pontic Step, circa 8000 years ago, or maybe they crossed the Caucasus together to install themselves in this new area.

    3/ R1a were located in the north of the Pontic Step and R1b in the south. But they together expand around the Pontic Step. R1a first to North and East-Europe, then in a second wave (about 4500 years ago), R1a to Central Asia (then South Asia) and R1b to Balkanic then Central and Western Europe.


    That's why Indo-European languages, identified since the end of the XIXth century, are spoken from Bangladesh to Ireland. That seems perfect, doesn't it ?


    However, there's something I can't understand.

    This beautiful story suppose that R1a and R1b living side to side in the Pontic Step had a common or- at least - related language, after beeing separated 10.000 years ago, during the late paleolithic period. It looks impossible, especially that we could suppose that the vocabulary in the paelolithic period have been weak, and most of the words created in the neolithic period...
    Beside, other R1 groups who doesn't participate to this emigration to the Pontic Stepp, doesn't speak proto-indoeuropean language at all (see for example the R1b-V88, migrating from South Caucasus to Levant then to Africa)

    Unless R1a or R1b imposed his language to the other group, but without really mixing them, what would seem strange to me.

    A third hypothesis could be that R1a and R1B both found in this Pontic Step (or during the crossing of the Caucasus) other groups (I2, J2, G, C ?) and, marrying their women, adopted their language . In this late hypothesis we could deduce that the Proto-Indo-European language have a more complexe origin.

    I haven't found any article or research about the question to know how R1a and R1b in the Stepp Pontic had the same language, or a similar language.

    Can someone help me with that question ?
    The social, cultural and linguistic dynamics that led to a particular group of people speaking Proto-Indo-European should be searched in the Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods.

    There is no such a thing as "R1a people" and "R1b people" which I often see people in forums talking about. Y-DNA haplogroups don't determine the entire ancestry of peoples, let alone for many thousands of years, with lots of admixture, genetic drift, founder events with booms and busts of particular lineages, etc. Even in the absence of any major admixture event (which in any case always happened from time to time), the Y-DNA composition of a population may change a lot just due to internal demographic/social dynamics. In the real world, where there's no such a thing as a "haplogroup-people", males with distinct haplogroups, but belonging to the same ethnicity, tend to be much closer to each other genetically than to males carrying the same haplogroup, but from distant and distint ethnicities (especially if you're talking of very upstream clades, things that have dozens of thousands of years of existence like "R1b", "J2", "G2").

    Y-DNA haplogroups do not determine a people's language, either. There may be some correlation, but the further back you go the weaker the correlation will be due to all kinds of social developments. Therefore, it's perfectly possible, even likely, that groups carrying mainly R1a or R1b came to speak the very same language, and even be extremely similar genetically, due to things that had happened to them much more recently. They don't need to have been speaking the same language or even the same language family since R1a and R1b first split into different haplogroups from the former common R1. They may have been brought together by social/cultural/political circumstances in much later times. For instance, in more recent times many N1c and I2 males have helped spread Indo-European (Russian) in Siberia, but that of course doesn't mean that the first bearers of those haplogroups already spoke a language of the Indo-European family.

    Think of modern people in Greece. If Greek suddenly "boomed" and had a huge demographic and linguistic expansion, the spread of Greek would be correlated with the expansion of several haplogroups (J2, E-V13, R1b, R1a etc.), and it's probable that in some places one of those haplogroups would randomly become much more common than the others, creating several Greek groups with different Y-DNA makeup, but initially very similar autosomally, and after some time, as they mixed with other local populations of the places where they had migrated to, they'd become also genetically different people.
    Last edited by Ygorcs; 03-05-19 at 10:12.

  12. #37
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points
    hrvclv's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-03-17
    Location
    Auvergne, France
    Posts
    410
    Points
    9,779
    Level
    29
    Points: 9,779, Level: 29
    Level completed: 72%, Points required for next Level: 171
    Overall activity: 5.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-U152-DF103
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1bm

    Ethnic group
    Arvern
    Country: France



    What you also have to take into account when trying to track ancient languages from modern ones is the fact that those modern languages derive from not only the original PIE variant brought to a specific place by the first steppe migrants, but also from the subsequent "layers" of steppe invaders that grafted themselves on the original over time.

    For example, it's hard to tell how much of Proto-Germanic (technically Centum) is owed to proto-east Beakers (R1b L51 > U106), and how much was kept from the language previously spoken by (essentially R1a - satem?) Corded Ware people. (Not taking into account the influence exerted on the phonology of the language by the I1 substrate).

    Similarly the fact that Albanian has both centum and satem words may be due to the mixing, at some stage, of Illyrian centum languages with (broadly) Thracian influxes - again, leaving aside the later impacts of romanization, hellenization, slavicization... Even within the Illyrian family, there may have been distinct variants that later mixed.

    That said, I think we should not disregard the fact that those ancient PIE speakers thought in terms of clans. The haplogroups and subclades must have been significant, to a degree. Not that those people were in any way aware of it, but they had a strong sense of genealogy, and reverence for their fathers, as the finds in their graves show. Look at DF27, U152, L21... you can track them to distinct places across western Europe. The same thing seems to have happened between P312 and U106. You can track the paternal lines quite separately. I guess on the steppe, R1a tribes and R1b tribes must have had the same tribal reflexes, which explains why, whichever group you consider, it is either massively R1a plus a few or no R1b, or massively R1b plus a few to no R1a.

    So I agree with Quentin that there is something we don't know about what happened on the steppe, and how those two haplos came to speak the same language.
    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)

  13. #38
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,400
    Points
    6,604
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,604, Level: 24
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 446
    Overall activity: 10.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    What people are mistaken i believe is that they think R1b was a Steppic population and R1a a Baltic Temperate orest one. But the R1a-M417 that gived birth to the Corded Ware continuum of cultures as his origin likely in the Yamnaya sphere of influence, north of it, in the Forest-Steppe. There was already discussions here and there about hints that some R1a very similar to the Corded were found in Yamnaya context, even by Reich labs, but no publications still. The ultimate origin for PIE if we are speaking about Pontic Steppe or Eastern Europe. Is either the Samara Bend, where R1a and R1b seems to have cohabited till Khvalynsk and maybe earlier. Or a sphere of influence between Steppe and Funnelbeaker / Globular Amphora Cultures.

  14. #39
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    etrusco's Avatar
    Join Date
    29-01-17
    Location
    lombardy
    Posts
    67
    Points
    1,807
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,807, Level: 11
    Level completed: 86%, Points required for next Level: 43
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    What people are mistaken i believe is that they think R1b was a Steppic population and R1a a Baltic Temperate orest one. But the R1a-M417 that gived birth to the Corded Ware continuum of cultures as his origin likely in the Yamnaya sphere of influence, north of it, in the Forest-Steppe. There was already discussions here and there about hints that some R1a very similar to the Corded were found in Yamnaya context, even by Reich labs, but no publications still. The ultimate origin for PIE if we are speaking about Pontic Steppe or Eastern Europe. Is either the Samara Bend, where R1a and R1b seems to have cohabited till Khvalynsk and maybe earlier. Or a sphere of influence between Steppe and Funnelbeaker / Globular Amphora Cultures.
    Some clarifications:

    1)R1a M417 belongs to a culture ( Skelya or Sredni Stog ) that is at least 1000 years older than Yamnaia. Skeyla (or SS) is born out of a strong cultural and demic influence from the balkano-carpathian region ( see Kotova on academia.eu). Of course the R1a sample is a local one and doesn't come from the west. Anthony talked already in 1986 that a group of steppe clans were likely incorporated in the higher ranks of Cucuteni Tripolye. The discovery of sample I5651 seems to confirm this theory ( steppe people with an overwhelmingly farmer culture).

    2) This mixed population ( roughly 50% EEF 50% Steppe eneolithic) then in the first half of the 4th millennium started to expand eastward ( to the Volga) to the south ( northern caucasus) and to the west . for all this read Rassamakin academia.eu. Genetic clearly confirms this because the Ukraine eneolithic genetic signal reaches both the Volga ( that is why Yamnaia Samara has circa 18% EEF ) and Afanasievo has ukraine eneolithic too ( 36%). Cultural package of Yamanaia is basically Sredni Stog ( aka Skelya) derived.

    3) so to sum up: the real player in the development of the famous steppe culture ( and steppe pastoralism ) was not the Volga but the contact zone between Cucuteni and Dneper Donets native people If you consider that PIE has an agricoltural vocabulary and that east of the Dneper we have no agricolture till 2000 BC it is clear that if we have to remain in the steppe theory ( the dogma par excellence!) the western steppe makes more sense than the Volga-Caspian alternative.

  15. #40
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,209
    Points
    40,464
    Level
    62
    Points: 40,464, Level: 62
    Level completed: 9%, Points required for next Level: 1,186
    Overall activity: 31.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    What people are mistaken i believe is that they think R1b was a Steppic population and R1a a Baltic Temperate orest one. But the R1a-M417 that gived birth to the Corded Ware continuum of cultures as his origin likely in the Yamnaya sphere of influence, north of it, in the Forest-Steppe. There was already discussions here and there about hints that some R1a very similar to the Corded were found in Yamnaya context, even by Reich labs, but no publications still. The ultimate origin for PIE if we are speaking about Pontic Steppe or Eastern Europe. Is either the Samara Bend, where R1a and R1b seems to have cohabited till Khvalynsk and maybe earlier. Or a sphere of influence between Steppe and Funnelbeaker / Globular Amphora Cultures.

    I agree with your mark about what people believe,
    But R1b is connected with Gedrosian, while R1a is not,
    That makes them seperated origin, I think,

  16. #41
    Junior Member Achievements:
    7 days registered100 Experience Points

    Join Date
    21-04-19
    Posts
    8
    Points
    162
    Level
    2
    Points: 162, Level: 2
    Level completed: 12%, Points required for next Level: 88
    Overall activity: 8.0%


    Country: France






    Think of modern people in Greece. If Greek suddenly "boomed" and had a huge demographic and linguistic expansion, the spread of Greek would be correlated with the expansion of several haplogroups (J2, E-V13, R1b, R1a etc.), and it's probable that in some places one of those haplogroups would randomly become much more common than the others, creating several Greek groups with different Y-DNA makeup, but initially very similar autosomally, and after some time, as they mixed with other local populations of the places where they had migrated to, they'd become also genetically different people;
    Think of modern people in Greece. If Greek suddenly "boomed" and had a huge demographic and linguistic expansion, the spread of Greek would be correlated with the expansion of several haplogroups (J2, E-V13, R1b, R1a etc.), and it's probable that in some places one of those haplogroups would randomly become much more common than the others, creating several Greek groups with different Y-DNA makeup, but initially very similar autosomally, and after some time, as they mixed with other local populations of the places where they had migrated to, they'd become also genetically different people.

    Ygorcs, thank you for your experienced analysis, it helps me to understand many things
    The "founder principle", the loss of genetic variety created by the spread of a small group belonging before to a bigger group often causes hasardous and surprising consequences, as the very good exemple you gave us (N and I spreading a language commonly linked with R1a populations, etc.).
    Meanwhile the study of haplogroups and the tentative to connect their history to the history of languages, remains interesting.
    Y-Dna says nothing about language, physical nor social specifications of a human group, that's right. But Y-Dna allows us to study migrations of some of ou ancestry without writed sources, and this is a revolution in historiography.

  17. #42
    Junior Member Achievements:
    7 days registered100 Experience Points

    Join Date
    21-04-19
    Posts
    8
    Points
    162
    Level
    2
    Points: 162, Level: 2
    Level completed: 12%, Points required for next Level: 88
    Overall activity: 8.0%


    Country: France



    Merci Hrvclv
    en effet je ne comprends toujours pas pourquoi les populations porteuses respectivement de R1a et R1b ne se sont pas tellement mlanges dans la steppe mais ont rpandu la mme langue. Ce n'est pas impossible mais c'est quand mme assez trange.

  18. #43
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,400
    Points
    6,604
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,604, Level: 24
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 446
    Overall activity: 10.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by Yetos View Post
    I agree with your mark about what people believe,
    But R1b is connected with Gedrosian, while R1a is not,
    That makes them seperated origin, I think,
    Well, the only possiblity to link Gedrosian admixture with an ancient component is with CHG. And Corded Ware did have CHG, in less proportion, so i dont know anymore. Gedrosian component seems so far away now about new datas of ancient components.

  19. #44
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Most Popular

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,727
    Points
    26,994
    Level
    50
    Points: 26,994, Level: 50
    Level completed: 45%, Points required for next Level: 556
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by etrusco View Post
    2) This mixed population ( roughly 50% EEF 50% Steppe eneolithic) then in the first half of the 4th millennium started to expand eastward ( to the Volga) to the south ( northern caucasus) and to the west . for all this read Rassamakin academia.eu. Genetic clearly confirms this because the Ukraine eneolithic genetic signal reaches both the Volga ( that is why Yamnaia Samara has circa 18% EEF ) and Afanasievo has ukraine eneolithic too ( 36%). Cultural package of Yamanaia is basically Sredni Stog ( aka Skelya) derived.

    3) so to sum up: the real player in the development of the famous steppe culture ( and steppe pastoralism ) was not the Volga but the contact zone between Cucuteni and Dneper Donets native people If you consider that PIE has an agricoltural vocabulary and that east of the Dneper we have no agricolture till 2000 BC it is clear that if we have to remain in the steppe theory ( the dogma par excellence!) the western steppe makes more sense than the Volga-Caspian alternative.
    Is it really certain that there was no agriculture east of the Dnieper till 2000 B.C.? I had read (in Anthony and others) that there is evidence of incipient agriculture since pretty early in the steppe cultures that would later give birth to Yamnaya (Chalcolithic or Early Bronze Age, I don't remember well now). PIE seems to have had only basic agricultural vocabulary, not a very extensive one, no wonder most of the individual IE branches usually have very large local non-IE substrate in their lexicon pertaining to agricultural life.

  20. #45
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842
    Points
    10,677
    Level
    31
    Points: 10,677, Level: 31
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 573
    Overall activity: 76.0%


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    Is it really certain that there was no agriculture east of the Dnieper till 2000 B.C.? I had read (in Anthony and others) that there is evidence of incipient agriculture since pretty early in the steppe cultures that would later give birth to Yamnaya (Chalcolithic or Early Bronze Age, I don't remember well now). PIE seems to have had only basic agricultural vocabulary, not a very extensive one, no wonder most of the individual IE branches usually have very large local non-IE substrate in their lexicon pertaining to agricultural life.
    IIRC, the Germanic agricultural substrate as proposed by Leiden includes words like bull, goat and sheep. That always seemed to me like a good argument against an origin in a culture like CW. Why would they borrow those words from farmers who were less reliant on livestock?

  21. #46
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,400
    Points
    6,604
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,604, Level: 24
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 446
    Overall activity: 10.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    I'm not sure about Crops east of the Dnieper, but we dont know clearly the extend of Globular Amphora toward East.

  22. #47
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,400
    Points
    6,604
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,604, Level: 24
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 446
    Overall activity: 10.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    IIRC, the Germanic agricultural substrate as proposed by Leiden includes words like bull, goat and sheep. That always seemed to me like a good argument against an origin in a culture like CW. Why would they borrow those words from farmers who were less reliant on livestock?
    I would not rely too much on this, because the original CWC language could have been post-influenced by Globular Amphora / Funnelbeaker somewhere.

  23. #48
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842
    Points
    10,677
    Level
    31
    Points: 10,677, Level: 31
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 573
    Overall activity: 76.0%


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    I would not rely too much on this, because the original CWC language could have been post-influenced by Globular Amphora / Funnelbeaker somewhere.
    But it contradicts the substrate hypothesis. Kroonen:

    The Substrate Theory entails that when the Indo-Europeans settled in thefuture core of the Germanic linguistic area, they imposed themselves and theirlanguage on an indigenous population with very different cultural and linguisticcharacteristics (cf. recently Rifkin 2007: 57). The original language(s) of this areaultimately disappeared, because its speakers shifted to a form of Indo-Europeanspeech, though not without leaving a trace. The language shift did not happenovernight, but was probably completed through a longer period of bilingualism, perhaps lasting several generations. As a result, the Indo-European dialect, during its evolution into Proto-Germanic, may have become enriched with variousindigenous terms for local plants and animals, geographical phenomena, andcultural practices
    That didn't happen in the Chalcolithic or the EBA.

  24. #49
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,400
    Points
    6,604
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,604, Level: 24
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 446
    Overall activity: 10.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    But it contradicts the substrate hypothesis. Kroonen:



    That didn't happen in the Chalcolithic or the EBA.
    What you are calling a germanic substrate, is actually a CWC substrate. Modern Germanic languages mainly descend from a R1b-U106 population, while the Germano-Balto-Slavic pre-substrate was with R1a-M417. And it totally goes along what i'm saying, because most of territory of CWC encompass Globular Amphora and Funnelbeaker. There they took the agricultural vocabulary. The CWC IE substrate might be older than Chalcolithic or related with Sredny Stog movement towards Funnelbeaker and Cucuteni territtories. Then also keep in mind even tho ancestrally EEF, most of Funnelbeaker and Globular Amphora y-dna is of HG's origin. How would it make more sense for an EEF origin for Northern geographical and plants words, while there was ancestral local HG's to learn that to them.

    Kroonen is totally projecting things with " Proto-Germanic, may have become enriched with various indigenous terms for local plants and animals, geographical phenomena, and cultural practices "

    Because CWC landscape is actually exactly the same as southern scandinavia. It's like learning a word for tomato while already knowing tomato.

  25. #50
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842
    Points
    10,677
    Level
    31
    Points: 10,677, Level: 31
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 573
    Overall activity: 76.0%


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    What you are calling a germanic substrate, is actually a CWC substrate. Modern Germanic languages mainly descend from a R1b-U106 population, while the Germano-Balto-Slavic pre-substrate was with R1a-M417. And it totally goes along what i'm saying, because most of territory of CWC encompass Globular Amphora and Funnelbeaker. There they took the agricultural vocabulary. The CWC IE substrate might be older than Chalcolithic or related with Sredny Stog movement towards Funnelbeaker and Cucuteni territtories. Then also keep in mind even tho ancestrally EEF, most of Funnelbeaker and Globular Amphora y-dna is of HG's origin. How would it make more sense for an EEF origin for Northern geographical and plants words, while there was ancestral local HG's to learn that to them.

    Kroonen is totally projecting things with " Proto-Germanic, may have become enriched with various indigenous terms for local plants and animals, geographical phenomena, and cultural practices "

    Because CWC landscape is actually exactly the same as southern scandinavia. It's like learning a word for tomato while already knowing tomato.
    That explanation doesn't work, since proponents of the hypothesis think the substrate is exclusive to Germanic.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •