This is reflected in the ANI aDNA as well. This is why I have posited that Indo-Iranian was in fact very much like Indic and was likely spoken in East Yamnaya at the very least, if not all of Yamnaya at its latter stages. This why known Iranian speaking samples in the West have some EEF(Sarmatian), but those further East do not. Sintashta and Andronovo almost certainly spoke Iranian.
Angela, where can i find this speech?For any one who wants to discuss the things he said.
It's really all in the title. Ancient DNA suggests Steppe migrations spread Indo-European languages
I personally sort of did a double take at this: No Steppe ancestry in aDNA data from Balkans and Anatolia.
So, no steppe from the Balkans into Anatolia either. If true, either Anatolian languages came south over the Caucasus, or the original Pre-or-proto Indo-European arose somewhere in Anatolia, as some of us have been saying for a long time was a possibility.
I wonder if my other suggestion at one time, that Greek came through Anatolia, could be true. That or it came with almost no people. How ironic if that should turn out to be true, given how often the Mycenaens were used to illuminate Indo-European societies: it may be a template for them but they might not be steppe people?
If it did come from the Caucasus and then across Anatolia, then it's a pincer movement from the Caucasus with one arrow going into the steppe, mixing there with EHG and then moving into Europe, and another arrow going from the Caucasus into the rest of Anatolia, the Balkans, and on to the rest of southern Europe.
If that's the case then Pagani et al may be onto something, and the "Indo- European component" may be some group related to "Caucasians".
Sintashta not an ancestor of Indic peoples (and Andrnovo?). So much for all those statistics predicting they would be... I just love all the pretending going on over at Eurogenes that they never thought any such thing.Has the thread been deleted?
and theoretically it can be correct but we can't even verify that the way the scholar chose to seperate the words is correct because they are seperated like that in the ring.
So the celts just absorbed over 70 huge illyrian tribes in a matter of a few hundred years?
I won't say that the article is wrong but a few things.
Irrespective of my views on it, a link of Albanian and Germanic has been supported by other scholars. I don't agree to be frank but you should refute their arguments.
(Look, though. In page 359 he compares reconstructed 'Indo-Ir./Balto-Sl.' pronouns to attested Attic Greek ones. That doesn't have to do much with his arguments but it's comparing apples to oranges. I don't take seriously into account those who do it)
I personally believe Albanian has a Phrygian element too. And Phrygian in some ways connects Greek with Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian.
We don't know much about 'Thracian'. Actually there are some inscriptions which are undepichered and seem incomprehensible.
Rolisteneas Nerenea tiltean ēsko Arazea domean Tilezupta miē era zēlta
I think in that incription 'domean' is translated as 'woman'. What is it's IE cognate? It seems superficially similar to English woman but that comes from wīfmann. We then can say that is is related to PIE *dem, *dom, Gk. domos, Lt. domus, OCS domŭ = home, house. So it is the person who stays in house or who rules the house if we want something more feminist
Rolisteneasn ereneatil teanēskoa razeadom eantilezu ptamiēe raz ēlta
(What is transcribed as ē can also be h)
