Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: Was Cimmerian (Old Persian) an Albanized Iranian language?

  1. #1
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    407
    Points
    1,682
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,682, Level: 11
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 99.1%


    Country: Iran



    2 out of 3 members found this post helpful.

    Was Cimmerian (Old Persian) an Albanized Iranian language?



    As you probably know we see the same sound changes in Old Persian and proto-Albanian languages, such as *ḱ>θ, *ǵ>d/ð, gʷ>g/z, ... in fact the only difference between Old Persian and proto-Albanian is that the sound changes in the first one happend on proto-Iranian but the second one on proto-IE, does it mean both of them originated in the same land but from almost two different cultures?

  2. #2
    Moderator Achievements:
    1 year registeredTagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Community Award

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,702
    Points
    25,472
    Level
    48
    Points: 25,472, Level: 48
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 78
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    What's your scientific source to claim that Cimmerian was Old Persian? It's not even widely believed that we have enough evidences to claim that Cimmerian was indeed Indo-Iranian, let alone Old Persian, which is a specific language of the Southwestern branch of the Iranic languages: Indo-Iranian > Proto-Iranic > Southwest Iranic > Old Persian. Cimmerian is actually thought by many to have been a sort of intermediary branch between Daco-Thracian and/or Illyrian (mostly the former, as far as I have read) and Indo-Iranian. There was probably such a thing as an "Albanized Iranian language", and in any case it is unlikely that Albanian had anything to do with Cimmerian in terms of recent linguistic origins. What probably happened is simply that the dialect continuum of the IE languages was not completely broken due to the expansion of just a few daughter languages up to the Iron Age, superseding most of the other "middle-ground" dialect groups (IE branches) that existed between them. There was probably a "Germanic-Celtic" language, a "Slavic-Indo-Iranian" language, a "Hellenic-Illyrian" language and so on, but those were not actual mixes of those IE branches, they were actually just dialects that shared features with one end and the other end of the IE dialect continuum. Cimmerian might've been one of the remnants of these extinct IE branches.

    Analyzing the connections between two languages based on their supposedly sharing some phonological developments in common is very misleading (and that is assuming that those sound rules are exactly identical, and not just similar in their ultimate consequences - I'm not sure about that). Languages are much more than their phonology, no proper assessment can be done without considering above all the morphology and syntax (and, secondarily, the lexicon too)... in fact there are some sound changes that are pretty common throughout the world under the same or similar conditions, so that they may happen in almost identical ways in different languages, in different times and places, without necessarily one of them having influenced the other, or their having a recent common root. For instance a "satem-like" change happened in Old French, affecting even the /ka, ko, ku/ syllables (not just /ke/ and /ki/ as in most other Romance languages), but that doesn't mean that it must've had some influence from a satem lanuage. The sound changes were completely independent, it just happens that palatalizations and subsequent fricativizations or sibilantization of consonants are a very common development in many languages' evolution. E

    ven if the sound change was identical and happened at the same time, that still does not imply necessarily an immediate common origin, because it may just point to areal features in a large Sprachbund, sharing some common linguistic trends.

  3. #3
    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 Cyrus View Post
    As you probably know we see the same sound changes in Old Persian and proto-Albanian languages, such as *ḱ>θ, *ǵ>d/ð, gʷ>g/z, ... in fact the only difference between Old Persian and proto-Albanian is that the sound changes in the first one happend on proto-Iranian but the second one on proto-IE, does it mean both of them originated in the same land but from almost two different cultures?
    Persians origins came from modern Tajikistan/uzbekistan and went to Persia in 1000BC ...............
    The Persians, and 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 around 1000 BC. They settled 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 Medes settled in the northwest and today are called the Kurds.
    Father's Mtdna H95a1
    Grandfather Mtdna T2b24
    Great Grandfather Mtdna T1a1e
    GMother paternal side YDna R1b-S8172
    Mother's YDna R1a-Z282

  4. #4
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    407
    Points
    1,682
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,682, Level: 11
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 99.1%


    Country: Iran



    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    What's your scientific source to claim that Cimmerian was Old Persian? It's not even widely believed that we have enough evidences to claim that Cimmerian was indeed Indo-Iranian, let alone Old Persian, which is a specific language of the Southwestern branch of the Iranic languages: Indo-Iranian > Proto-Iranic > Southwest Iranic > Old Persian. Cimmerian is actually thought by many to have been a sort of intermediary branch between Daco-Thracian and/or Illyrian (mostly the former, as far as I have read) and Indo-Iranian. There was probably such a thing as an "Albanized Iranian language", and in any case it is unlikely that Albanian had anything to do with Cimmerian in terms of recent linguistic origins. What probably happened is simply that the dialect continuum of the IE languages was not completely broken due to the expansion of just a few daughter languages up to the Iron Age, superseding most of the other "middle-ground" dialect groups (IE branches) that existed between them. There was probably a "Germanic-Celtic" language, a "Slavic-Indo-Iranian" language, a "Hellenic-Illyrian" language and so on, but those were not actual mixes of those IE branches, they were actually just dialects that shared features with one end and the other end of the IE dialect continuum. Cimmerian might've been one of the remnants of these extinct IE branches.

    Analyzing the connections between two languages based on their supposedly sharing some phonological developments in common is very misleading (and that is assuming that those sound rules are exactly identical, and not just similar in their ultimate consequences - I'm not sure about that). Languages are much more than their phonology, no proper assessment can be done without considering above all the morphology and syntax (and, secondarily, the lexicon too)... in fact there are some sound changes that are pretty common throughout the world under the same or similar conditions, so that they may happen in almost identical ways in different languages, in different times and places, without necessarily one of them having influenced the other, or their having a recent common root. For instance a "satem-like" change happened in Old French, affecting even the /ka, ko, ku/ syllables (not just /ke/ and /ki/ as in most other Romance languages), but that doesn't mean that it must've had some influence from a satem lanuage. The sound changes were completely independent, it just happens that palatalizations and subsequent fricativizations or sibilantization of consonants are a very common development in many languages' evolution. E

    ven if the sound change was identical and happened at the same time, that still does not imply necessarily an immediate common origin, because it may just point to areal features in a large Sprachbund, sharing some common linguistic trends.
    I have talked about Cimmerians in some other threads, as I said I am a historian and I don't care what nationalists say, there is absolutely no evidence which shows Persians lived in Iran before the arrival of Cimmerians in the 8th century BC, it is clear who established Parsua kingdom in the northwest of Iran, destroyed Ellipi kingdom and conquered Anshan (Persia), ...
    I strongly believe that sound changes didn't happen in languages without any reason, there are some important reasons for these changes, like phonology of native languages, it is possible that for example "d" is changed to "t" in two different languages in two different places but when we talk about a group of different sound changes, especially in different places of articulation, it is difficult to believe there is no relation between them.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered10000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Johane Derite's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-06-17
    Posts
    916
    Points
    12,460
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,460, Level: 33
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 190
    Overall activity: 9.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U1a1a

    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    As you probably know we see the same sound changes in Old Persian and proto-Albanian languages, such as *ḱ>θ, *ǵ>d/ð, gʷ>g/z, ... in fact the only difference between Old Persian and proto-Albanian is that the sound changes in the first one happend on proto-Iranian but the second one on proto-IE, does it mean both of them originated in the same land but from almost two different cultures?
    What historical mechanism would have been required for Iranian to become Albanized?
    "As we have already stressed, the mass evacuation of the Albanians from their triangle is the only effective course we can take. In order to relocate a whole people, the first prerequisite is the creation of a suitable psychosis. This can be done in various ways." - Vaso Cubrilovic

  6. #6
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    407
    Points
    1,682
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,682, Level: 11
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 99.1%


    Country: Iran



    Quote Originally Posted by Johane Derite View Post
    What historical mechanism would have been required for Iranian to become Albanized?

    It is difficult to explain what happened, many Persian and Albanian words seem to be the same with just different vowels, for example:

    Proto-IE: *g'eus-
    Meaning: to choose

    Old Indian: jóṣati
    Avestan: zaoš
    Old Persian: dauš
    Old Greek: géuomai
    Germanic: *kiús
    Latin: gustāre
    Celtic: gusi
    Albanian: deša

    Persian and Albanian words actually mean "to love".

    Proto-IE: *gʷen-, *gʷnā-
    Meaning: woman, wife

    Tokharian: śäṃ
    Old Indian: gnā́
    Avestan: gǝnā
    Persian: zan
    Armenian: kēn
    Old Greek: günǟ́
    Slavic: *ženā́
    Baltic: *gen-ā
    Germanic: *kwin
    Celtic: *guenā
    Albanian: zónjë

    Albanian is actually neither Centum, nor Satem, in fact the proccess of Palatalization ([k] > [kʲ], [c], [tʃ], [ts], [ʃ], [s]) has been stopped at [ts] and then it has been changed to [th].

    For example from Proto-IE déḱm "ten", there are:

    Italic: *dekem
    Celtic: *dekam
    Hellenic: *dékə
    Tocharian: śäk
    Germanic: *texun
    Old Indian: dáśa
    Avestan: dasā
    Old Persian: datha
    Albanian: djeth
    Armenian: tasn
    Balto-Slavic: *dešimtis

    [k] > [kʲ], [c] (proto-Indo-Iranian), [tʃ] (proto-Iranian), [ts] (proto-Albanian), [ʃ] (proto-Balto-Slavic), [s] (Indian/Iranian)

  7. #7
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran5000 Experience Points
    LABERIA's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-15
    Posts
    2,012
    Points
    5,513
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,513, Level: 21
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 37
    Overall activity: 5.0%


    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    2 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    Zonjë is for lady, grua is for woman, but can stand. Number ten in Albanian is dhjetë, not djeth. When you talk, you can "forget" the ë in the end and you can say simply dhjet. dh is like this meanwhile j is like yes in English.
    In Albanian there is the word hallë for the aunt from the father side, because in Albanian we have two different words to distinguish the sister of the mother from the sister of the father, the same is even for the uncles, again two different words.
    This word hallë is similar with the Iranian word for aunt, i don't remember now the exact word in iranian. Some say that is borrowed from Persian through Turkish, but i think is not a borrowing but a native word of the Albanian language.
    17 Dec.
    Paget to the Council.

    Now the Council's letters seem to imply (words quoted) that the King will keep no strangers save the Albanoys.

    Cales, 17 Dec. 1545. Signed.


  8. #8
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    407
    Points
    1,682
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,682, Level: 11
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 99.1%


    Country: Iran



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by LABERIA View Post
    Zonjë is for lady, grua is for woman, but can stand. Number ten in Albanian is dhjetë, not djeth. When you talk, you can "forget" the ë in the end and you can say simply dhjet. dh is like this meanwhile j is like yes in English.
    In Albanian there is the word hallë for the aunt from the father side, because in Albanian we have two different words to distinguish the sister of the mother from the sister of the father, the same is even for the uncles, again two different words.
    This word hallë is similar with the Iranian word for aunt, i don't remember now the exact word in iranian. Some say that is borrowed from Persian through Turkish, but i think is not a borrowing but a native word of the Albanian language.
    I talk about Old Albanian language, there are certainly many Persian and Arabic words in Albanian, mostly through Ottoman Turkish, like xale "aunt" that you mentioned. Albanian dhjetë https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dhjet%C3%AB is from *djeth + -të, from Proto-Albanian *detsa.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,190
    Points
    39,350
    Level
    61
    Points: 39,350, Level: 61
    Level completed: 24%, Points required for next Level: 1,000
    Overall activity: 48.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    @ Cyrus @ Ygorcs

    I have nothice long time ago about the common aspiration that they have,
    but I consider it as Scythian connection from minor Scythia,

    Is ithis possible?
    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.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    407
    Points
    1,682
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,682, Level: 11
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 99.1%


    Country: Iran



    Quote Originally Posted by Yetos View Post
    @ Cyrus @ Ygorcs

    I have nothice long time ago about the common aspiration that they have,
    but I consider it as Scythian connection from minor Scythia,

    Is ithis possible?
    Scythian was an eastern Iranian language, one of its descendant is Ossetian, for example the Ossetic word for "ten" is dæs, or zimæg means "winter", compare Avestan zǝm but Old Persian daim and Albanian dimër, zinon "yesterday", Avestan zyō but Old Persian diya, ...

  11. #11
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran5000 Experience Points
    LABERIA's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-15
    Posts
    2,012
    Points
    5,513
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,513, Level: 21
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 37
    Overall activity: 5.0%


    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    I talk about Old Albanian language, there are certainly many Persian and Arabic words in Albanian, mostly through Ottoman Turkish, like xale "aunt" that you mentioned. Albanian dhjetë https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dhjet%C3%AB is from *djeth + -të, from Proto-Albanian *detsa.
    I thought you were talking about Albanian and not Proto-Albanian.
    I don't think that the word hallë is a borrowing from Persian.
    Anyway, the discussion is another. There are plenty of theories similar with yours. Here you have another theory:
    http://www.lituanus.org/1993_2/93_2_05.htm
    All these reconstruction of proto languages, etc, are simply theories, including the theory of the Indo-European languages which is an scientific theory based on..... Bible.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered10000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Johane Derite's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-06-17
    Posts
    916
    Points
    12,460
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,460, Level: 33
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 190
    Overall activity: 9.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U1a1a

    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    It is difficult to explain what happened, many Persian and Albanian words seem to be the same with just different vowels, for example:

    Proto-IE: *g'eus-
    Meaning: to choose

    Old Indian: jóṣati
    Avestan: zaoš
    Old Persian: dauš
    Old Greek: géuomai
    Germanic: *kiús
    Latin: gustāre
    Celtic: gusi
    Albanian: deša

    Persian and Albanian words actually mean "to love".

    Proto-IE: *gʷen-, *gʷnā-
    Meaning: woman, wife

    Tokharian: śäṃ
    Old Indian: gnā́
    Avestan: gǝnā
    Persian: zan
    Armenian: kēn
    Old Greek: günǟ́
    Slavic: *ženā́
    Baltic: *gen-ā
    Germanic: *kwin
    Celtic: *guenā
    Albanian: zónjë

    Albanian is actually neither Centum, nor Satem, in fact the proccess of Palatalization ([k] > [kʲ], [c], [tʃ], [ts], [ʃ], [s]) has been stopped at [ts] and then it has been changed to [th].

    For example from Proto-IE déḱm "ten", there are:

    Italic: *dekem
    Celtic: *dekam
    Hellenic: *dékə
    Tocharian: śäk
    Germanic: *texun
    Old Indian: dáśa
    Avestan: dasā
    Old Persian: datha
    Albanian: djeth
    Armenian: tasn
    Balto-Slavic: *dešimtis

    [k] > [kʲ], [c] (proto-Indo-Iranian), [tʃ] (proto-Iranian), [ts] (proto-Albanian), [ʃ] (proto-Balto-Slavic), [s] (Indian/Iranian)
    Alb. "Dua/due " (to want / to love) comes from
    *duām, from Proto-Albanian *duēs-mi, from Proto-Indo-European *deus- (compare English tire, Ancient Greek δεύομαι (deomai) to lack)

  13. #13
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered10000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Johane Derite's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-06-17
    Posts
    916
    Points
    12,460
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,460, Level: 33
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 190
    Overall activity: 9.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U1a1a

    Country: Albania



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    It is difficult to explain what happened, many Persian and Albanian words seem to be the same with just different vowels, for example:

    Proto-IE: *g'eus-
    Meaning: to choose

    Old Indian: jóṣati
    Avestan: zaoš
    Old Persian: dauš
    Old Greek: géuomai
    Germanic: *kiús
    Latin: gustāre
    Celtic: gusi
    Albanian: deša

    Persian and Albanian words actually mean "to love".

    Proto-IE: *gʷen-, *gʷnā-
    Meaning: woman, wife

    Tokharian: śäṃ
    Old Indian: gnā́
    Avestan: gǝnā
    Persian: zan
    Armenian: kēn
    Old Greek: günǟ́
    Slavic: *ženā́
    Baltic: *gen-ā
    Germanic: *kwin
    Celtic: *guenā
    Albanian: zónjë

    Albanian is actually neither Centum, nor Satem, in fact the proccess of Palatalization ([k] > [kʲ], [c], [tʃ], [ts], [ʃ], [s]) has been stopped at [ts] and then it has been changed to [th].

    For example from Proto-IE déḱm "ten", there are:

    Italic: *dekem
    Celtic: *dekam
    Hellenic: *dékə
    Tocharian: śäk
    Germanic: *texun
    Old Indian: dáśa
    Avestan: dasā
    Old Persian: datha
    Albanian: djeth
    Armenian: tasn
    Balto-Slavic: *dešimtis

    [k] > [kʲ], [c] (proto-Indo-Iranian), [tʃ] (proto-Iranian), [ts] (proto-Albanian), [ʃ] (proto-Balto-Slavic), [s] (Indian/Iranian)
    Likewise, as Laberia pointed out, you have chosen zonj, when it doesnt share the same root as the other words its being compared to. Grua/Grue is the cognate of those.

    Zonj is cognate with Potnia, the goddess in mycanea

  14. #14
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    407
    Points
    1,682
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,682, Level: 11
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 99.1%


    Country: Iran



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Johane Derite View Post
    Alb. "Dua/due " (to want / to love) comes from
    *duām, from Proto-Albanian *duēs-mi, from Proto-Indo-European *deus- (compare English tire, Ancient Greek δεύομαι (de�omai) �to lack�)
    Those are what linguists say, not me, of course it is poosible that some linguists also have different theories about them but I don't think that anyone denies proto-IE *ǵ is changed to d/dh in Albanian.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    407
    Points
    1,682
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,682, Level: 11
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 99.1%


    Country: Iran



    Quote Originally Posted by LABERIA View Post
    I thought you were talking about Albanian and not Proto-Albanian.
    I don't think that the word hallë is a borrowing from Persian.
    Anyway, the discussion is another. There are plenty of theories similar with yours. Here you have another theory:
    http://www.lituanus.org/1993_2/93_2_05.htm
    All these reconstruction of proto languages, etc, are simply theories, including the theory of the Indo-European languages which is an scientific theory based on..... Bible.
    xale "aunt" is from Arabic, not Persian, in Arabic it is female equivalent of xal "uncle".

    There can be certainly different theories about contacts and relations between Indo-European languages, these theories can help us to find more info about the history of these people.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    407
    Points
    1,682
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,682, Level: 11
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 99.1%


    Country: Iran



    As I mentioned in another thread I think Cimmerian migration to Pontus and west Persia relates to haplogroup R1b-Z2103: https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplo...1b_Y-DNA.shtml


  17. #17
    Moderator Achievements:
    1 year registeredTagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Community Award

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,702
    Points
    25,472
    Level
    48
    Points: 25,472, Level: 48
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 78
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    I have talked about Cimmerians in some other threads, as I said I am a historian and I don't care what nationalists say, there is absolutely no evidence which shows Persians lived in Iran before the arrival of Cimmerians in the 8th century BC, it is clear who established Parsua kingdom in the northwest of Iran, destroyed Ellipi kingdom and conquered Anshan (Persia), ...
    I strongly believe that sound changes didn't happen in languages without any reason, there are some important reasons for these changes, like phonology of native languages, it is possible that for example "d" is changed to "t" in two different languages in two different places but when we talk about a group of different sound changes, especially in different places of articulation, it is difficult to believe there is no relation between them.
    That doesn't prove that Cimmerian is Old Persian, especially when we know that Persian is just one language among many other Southwestern Iranic languages, and that they're clearly related to Northeastern Iranic languages of Central Asia. You're just assuming that the Cimmerians had a linguistic impact, while all the Iranic movements into South-Central Asia and the Iranian Plateau didn't. It's absolutely clear that Persian was not spoken near literate civilizations in Iran before the Early Iron Age (that's all we can say for sure, it may in fact have been spoken in parts of the Iranian Plateau that didn't have close and frequent contacts with the societies who left us written records), but I think you're making a leap of faith by assuming that that necessarily means it was brought by Cimmerians.

    Well, you may believe that, but there are documented evidences of unrelated languages, even belonging to different language families in territories completely apart from each other, having experienced the same phonological trends, and in my opinion that's even more likely to not involve any common origin or mutual influence when the change affected different places of articulation, because then that indicates that those languages, independently or not, began a phonological trend that ended up causing consequences to several different consonants and/or vowels. There is no evidence at all that similar sound changes, triggered by the same geneneral processes, imply a common descent.

    For instance, Brazilian Portuguese and Canadian French dialects independently evolved palatalization followed by fricativization of /t/ and /d/ before the vowel /i/, and that in fact also happened in Japanese. That doesn't mean that they had to have been in close contact (and since the change in Canada and Brazil happened much more recently we actually know for a fact that they weren't), it just means that a similar trend in the articulation of sounds ended up leading to similar final effects: /ts/ and /dz/ in Canada, /tsh/ and /dzh/ in Brazil.

  18. #18
    Moderator Achievements:
    1 year registeredTagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Community Award

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,702
    Points
    25,472
    Level
    48
    Points: 25,472, Level: 48
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 78
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    It is difficult to explain what happened, many Persian and Albanian words seem to be the same with just different vowels, for example:

    Proto-IE: *g'eus-
    Meaning: to choose

    Old Indian: jóṣati
    Avestan: zaoš
    Old Persian: dauš
    Old Greek: géuomai
    Germanic: *kiús
    Latin: gustāre
    Celtic: gusi
    Albanian: deša

    Persian and Albanian words actually mean "to love".

    Proto-IE: *gʷen-, *gʷnā-
    Meaning: woman, wife

    Tokharian: śäṃ
    Old Indian: gnā́
    Avestan: gǝnā
    Persian: zan
    Armenian: kēn
    Old Greek: günǟ́
    Slavic: *ženā́
    Baltic: *gen-ā
    Germanic: *kwin
    Celtic: *guenā
    Albanian: zónjë

    Albanian is actually neither Centum, nor Satem, in fact the proccess of Palatalization ([k] > [kʲ], [c], [tʃ], [ts], [ʃ], [s]) has been stopped at [ts] and then it has been changed to [th].

    For example from Proto-IE déḱm "ten", there are:

    Italic: *dekem
    Celtic: *dekam
    Hellenic: *dékə
    Tocharian: śäk
    Germanic: *texun
    Old Indian: dáśa
    Avestan: dasā
    Old Persian: datha
    Albanian: djeth
    Armenian: tasn
    Balto-Slavic: *dešimtis

    [k] > [kʲ], [c] (proto-Indo-Iranian), [tʃ] (proto-Iranian), [ts] (proto-Albanian), [ʃ] (proto-Balto-Slavic), [s] (Indian/Iranian)
    It's a mistake to believe that all "satem-like" changes are the same and necessarily happened at the same time. If we go by that token, and we didn't knew anything about Old Italic languages, we'd think that Romance languages were a "satemized" (Iranianized, Albanianized?) language family, but in fact we just know that palatalization of vowels, especially before front vowels, is very common, so that change may happen independently in place and time. [k] > [kj] > [ts], [tsh], [th], [s] in Romance languages is pretty "satem-like", but we know that it happened mostly in the last 1500 years, and has nothing to do with similar developments much earlier in other IE branches.

  19. #19
    Moderator Achievements:
    1 year registeredTagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Community Award

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,702
    Points
    25,472
    Level
    48
    Points: 25,472, Level: 48
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 78
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    Scythian was an eastern Iranian language, one of its descendant is Ossetian, for example the Ossetic word for "ten" is dæs, or zimæg means "winter", compare Avestan zǝm but Old Persian daim and Albanian dimër, zinon "yesterday", Avestan zyō but Old Persian diya, ...
    To be fair we actually don't know if Scythian languages were all Eastern Iranic. We know almost nothing about them, and most of the evidences about those that we do come from the southern part of Central Asia (Sogdian, Saka Khotanese), but barely anything about the actual steppe languages, especially those in the western portion of it. Considering the genetic heterogeneity that has been found in the Scytho-Sarmatian DNA samples, I highly doubt they all spoke the same language, and I actually think it's highly likely that Indo-Aryan, Southwestern Iranic, Dardic (Indo-Iranian branches) came from the lands that would become generically known as "Scythian". So I think it's probable they spoke related languages, and maybe Eastern Iranic prevailed over the others, but they might've spoken several Indo-Iranian subgroups at least originally, before the consolidation of a more homogeneous Scythian cultural complex roughly after 700-800 B.C.

  20. #20
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-12-15
    Posts
    417
    Points
    5,543
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,543, Level: 21
    Level completed: 99%, Points required for next Level: 7
    Overall activity: 24.0%


    Country: Canada



    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.

    Exclamation

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    I have talked about Cimmerians in some other threads, as I said I am a historian and I don't care what nationalists say, there is absolutely no evidence which shows Persians lived in Iran before the arrival of Cimmerians in the 8th century BC, it is clear who established Parsua kingdom in the northwest of Iran, destroyed Ellipi kingdom and conquered Anshan (Persia), ...
    So far two cimmerian samples have R1b1a and Q1a with lots of east asian admixture, and the east asian admixture also at the iron age of anatolia. Likewise, there is a possibility that greek bronze would have the east asian admixture also. So I just think cimmerian originated in altai, and maybe persian too.

    https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....tai-petroglyph
    https://indo-european.eu/wp-content/...south-asia.jpg
    https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/10/eaat4457

    Anyway, do you know where the Darius tomb culture came from?




    china late bronze:
    http://www.ancient-encounters.com/AE...iles/%20r1.jpg

    mesoamerica:
    http://www.ancient-encounters.com/AE...1-filtered.jpg

  21. #21
    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 Cyrus View Post
    I have talked about Cimmerians in some other threads, as I said I am a historian and I don't care what nationalists say, there is absolutely no evidence which shows Persians lived in Iran before the arrival of Cimmerians in the 8th century BC, it is clear who established Parsua kingdom in the northwest of Iran, destroyed Ellipi kingdom and conquered Anshan (Persia), ...
    I strongly believe that sound changes didn't happen in languages without any reason, there are some important reasons for these changes, like phonology of native languages, it is possible that for example "d" is changed to "t" in two different languages in two different places but when we talk about a group of different sound changes, especially in different places of articulation, it is difficult to believe there is no relation between them.
    Are there any onomastic surveys of the West Iranian core area? Who lived in the northerncentral plateau and Balochistan before the Iranics came?

  22. #22
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    407
    Points
    1,682
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,682, Level: 11
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 99.1%


    Country: Iran



    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    That doesn't prove that Cimmerian is Old Persian, especially when we know that Persian is just one language among many other Southwestern Iranic languages, and that they're clearly related to Northeastern Iranic languages of Central Asia. You're just assuming that the Cimmerians had a linguistic impact, while all the Iranic movements into South-Central Asia and the Iranian Plateau didn't. It's absolutely clear that Persian was not spoken near literate civilizations in Iran before the Early Iron Age (that's all we can say for sure, it may in fact have been spoken in parts of the Iranian Plateau that didn't have close and frequent contacts with the societies who left us written records), but I think you're making a leap of faith by assuming that that necessarily means it was brought by Cimmerians.
    Do you believe Persians and Medes lived in Iran before 800 BC? If they lived in the west of Iran then there should be certainly some info about them in Mesopotamian and Elamite sources, and if they lived in the center or east of Iran then there should be some info about them in Avesta or Rigveda, we read about the lands so far west as Rhaga (south of modern Tehran) in Avesta and traces of Indo-Aryan culture can be found so far west as Mittani (modern Syria), it sounds impossible that western Iranian people also lived in this region but without any contact with eastern and western people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    Well, you may believe that, but there are documented evidences of unrelated languages, even belonging to different language families in territories completely apart from each other, having experienced the same phonological trends, and in my opinion that's even more likely to not involve any common origin or mutual influence when the change affected different places of articulation, because then that indicates that those languages, independently or not, began a phonological trend that ended up causing consequences to several different consonants and/or vowels. There is no evidence at all that similar sound changes, triggered by the same geneneral processes, imply a common descent.

    For instance, Brazilian Portuguese and Canadian French dialects independently evolved palatalization followed by fricativization of /t/ and /d/ before the vowel /i/, and that in fact also happened in Japanese. That doesn't mean that they had to have been in close contact (and since the change in Canada and Brazil happened much more recently we actually know for a fact that they weren't), it just means that a similar trend in the articulation of sounds ended up leading to similar final effects: /ts/ and /dz/ in Canada, /tsh/ and /dzh/ in Brazil.
    About your example, this sound change in Brazilian Portuguese seems to be really under influence of Japanese, according to wikipedia, it has always been standard in Brazil's Japanese community since it is also a feature of Japanese.

    The fact is that for example we see *ǵ>dz>dh & *ḱ>ts>th in Albanian and Western Iranian but *ǵ>dz>z & *ḱ>ts>s in Eastern Iranian and Balto-Slavic languages, it doesn't mean that these languages are the same but it is certainly possible that they originated in the same region, I see no reason that we want to focus on some rare exceptions.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    407
    Points
    1,682
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,682, Level: 11
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 99.1%


    Country: Iran



    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs
    It's a mistake to believe that all "satem-like" changes are the same and necessarily happened at the same time. If we go by that token, and we didn't knew anything about Old Italic languages, we'd think that Romance languages were a "satemized" (Iranianized, Albanianized?) language family, but in fact we just know that palatalization of vowels, especially before front vowels, is very common, so that change may happen independently in place and time. [k] > [kj] > [ts], [tsh], [th], [s] in Romance languages is pretty "satem-like", but we know that it happened mostly in the last 1500 years, and has nothing to do with similar developments much earlier in other IE branches.
    Please mention some examples, in which Romance language [k] has been changed to [th]? It is certainly possible that [k] is changed to [ch] or [x] in different languages or it is changed to [th] or other sounds in just a few words, but when it is said that [k] has been changed to [th] in almost all words in two languages, it is difficult to believe there is no relation between them.

  24. #24
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-12-15
    Posts
    417
    Points
    5,543
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,543, Level: 21
    Level completed: 99%, Points required for next Level: 7
    Overall activity: 24.0%


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    Do you believe Persians and Medes lived in Iran before 800 BC? If they lived in the west of Iran then there should be certainly some info about them in Mesopotamian and Elamite sources, and if they lived in the center or east of Iran then there should be some info about them in Avesta or Rigveda, we read about the lands so far west as Rhaga (south of modern Tehran) in Avesta and traces of Indo-Aryan culture can be found so far west as Mittani (modern Syria), it sounds impossible that western Iranian people also lived in this region but without any contact with eastern and western people.



    About your example, this sound change in Brazilian Portuguese seems to be really under influence of Japanese, according to wikipedia, it has always been standard in Brazil's Japanese community since it is also a feature of Japanese.

    The fact is that for example we see *ǵ>dz>dh & *ḱ>ts>th in Albanian and Western Iranian but *ǵ>dz>z & *ḱ>ts>s in Eastern Iranian and Balto-Slavic languages, it doesn't mean that these languages are the same but it is certainly possible that they originated in the same region, I see no reason that we want to focus on some rare exceptions.
    However, the persian and Medes were called "Arya." So it is a problem to directly connect persians to cimmerians. I think a answer to the same origin would be from the aryan's continuous migrations from the Altai, including scythian. The altai people at bronze age is same people as east european at that time.

    Unfortunately, the Assyrian eastern campaigns temporarily ceased in the 12th–10th centuries BC due to an internal crisis. Accordingly, the sources lack any information on the ethnic situation in Iran during this period (D’yakonov 1956: 137-138; Dandamaev and Lukonin 1980). Assyria fought campaigns against Media only from 834 to 788 BC. References to a country of Parsua, of a kingdom of Manna in Iranian Azerbaijan, and of a union of ‘the strong Medes’ appear in the 9th century BC. Herodotus (1.101) enumerated six Median tribes, three among them having an Iranian etymology: arizantoi (‘the tribe of Aryas’), stroukhates, paretakīnoi. The latter were localized in the east—in Isfahan and in Central Asia. ‘Arya’ was the self-designation of different Indo-Iranian peoples (Indo-Aryans, Western Iranians-Medes and Persians). Darius I says in the inscription of Naqsh-i-Rustem that he is a “a Persian, a son of a Persian, an Arya, from the family of Aryas”. ‘Arya’ was also how the Eastern Iranians called themselves: it is often met in Scythian names and in Ossetic (Abaev 1949 I: 156).
    see the headgear. the left persian one is like scythian's and the right greek one has east scythian hair mode (american indian Mohawk hairstyle). Both swords have seima turbion style.



    see also darius's and scythian's helmet:



    right: a drawing by cand.sci.(history) d.v. pozdnyakov (iae sb ras) based on the reconstruction of the felt helmet by e.v. shumakova (iae sb ras). ak-alakha 1 burial mound 1
    https://scfh.ru/en/news/the-ukok-fem...yryk-culture-/

    see bird image [mean sky (= Zeus)] in the scythian helmet and mycenaean burial


    https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....ai-petroglyph&
    Last edited by johen; 05-05-19 at 19:38.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    407
    Points
    1,682
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,682, Level: 11
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 168
    Overall activity: 99.1%


    Country: Iran



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    Are there any onomastic surveys of the West Iranian core area? Who lived in the northerncentral plateau and Balochistan before the Iranics came?
    In Sumerian and Akkadian sources, there are two major lands in the east of Elam, it is very possible that the names of Parsi (Persian) and Balochi relate to them, the first one is Marhasi (Parhasi/Barhasi) and another one is Melukhkha (Belukhkha), the second one seems to be the same as Mleccha in Sanskrit with the meaning of "barbarian, foreigner", it is believed that they were a Dravidian people. Marhasi/Parhasi culture seems to be related to Elamite culture, we have some info about their kings and religion, they were certainly not Iranian.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •