User Tag List

Page 1 of 55 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 545

Thread: proto-Slavic synonymous with proto-Indo-European? (split) //mod2792 days old

  1. #1
    Established Member
    Turboslavic Caveman Pioterus's Avatar
    Last Online
    2019-04-25 @ 10:53
    Join Date
    2010-12-21
    Posts
    2,511
    Location
    Lasy Pomorza
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Y-DNA
    I2a1b2a1a1 (A2423+)
    mtDNA
    U3a1a(1)
    Race
    Europid
    Metaethnos
    Slavic
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Politics
    laissez faire
    Religion
    Metalhead
    Poland Lithuania Grand Duchy

    Default proto-Slavic synonymous with proto-Indo-European? (split) //mod

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    So yeah, R-M17 is the proto-Indo-European marker. And not to sound “Eurocentric”, but Indo-European is primarily a Europid language family.
    What say you on this little graph from my signature link? And for clarification - no I do not believe what Mr Jandacek claims, that small slavic countries were able to keep the original "root" PIE version of slavic languages. The only two languages still close to that are Polish and Russian* due to vast population (social Elites!) speaking it through the ages into modernity.

    *maybe ruthenian as well, while Ruthenians were strong independent ethnicity in their mighty Magnus Ducatus Lithuaniae dominion.
    and the IEEE Milestone for breaking the Enigma Code goes to... Polish Cipher Bureau 1932-39

    “We know each other,” he agreed. “They say that you follow in my steps.”
    “I go my own way. But you, you had never, until just now, looked behind you. You turned back today for the first time.”
    Geralt remained silent. Tired, he had nothing to say. “How... How will it happen?” he asked her at last, coldly and without emotion. “I will take you by the hand,” she replied, looking him straight in the eye. “I will take you by the hand and lead you across the meadow, through a cold and wet fog.” “And after? What is there beyond the fog?” “Nothing,” she replied, smiling. “After that, there is nothing.”
    ― Andrzej Sapkowski
    Świat się zmienia, słońce zachodzi, a wódka się kończy [The world is changing, sun is setting and we're running out of Vodka.]
    ― Andrzej Sapkowski

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Pioterus For This Useful Post:

    EliasAlucard (2011-09-27)

  3. # ADS
    Advertisement bot
    Join Date
    2013-03-24
    Location
    ForumBiodiversity.com
    Age
    2010
    Posts
    All threads
       
     

  4. #2
    Senior Moderator
    Plant of Life = Biological Magic 麻 EliasAlucard's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2009-10-22
    Posts
    14,607
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Y-DNA
    J1a2a1a2-P58+
    mtDNA
    H5a
    Race
    Caucasian
    Phenotype
    Alpinid
    Metaethnos
    proto-Semitic
    Ethnicity
    Assyrian/Armenian
    Politics
    Environment, Cannabis
    Religion
    Secular Agnostic
    Assyria Assyria 1913-1923 Armenia Lebanon Sweden Greece

    Default

    I've been reading some interesting Indo-European litterature lately, most notably The Horse, the Wheel and Language, as well as Aryan Idols (critical "anti-racist" book written from a Marxist POV by Stefan Arvidsson), so this post of mine may seem a bit over the top, but it's mostly an attempt to debate the topic in a highbrow manner

    Quote Originally Posted by Pioterus View Post
    What say you on this little graph from my signature link? And for clarification - no I do not believe what Mr Jandacek claims, that small slavic countries were able to keep the original "root" PIE version of slavic languages. The only two languages still close to that are Polish and Russian* due to vast population (social Elites!) speaking it through the ages into modernity.

    *maybe ruthenian as well, while Ruthenians were strong independent ethnicity in their mighty Magnus Ducatus Lithuaniae dominion.
    It's a quasi-academic article, with some very interesting points, but it has some serious flaws, such as, for example, citing Antonio Arnaiz-Villena's fringe study:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio...d_Sub-Saharans

    For the record, I do agree to some extent with the views of Arnaiz-Villena on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and their shared genetic components, but I do have some disagreements with his POV in his other studies, and anyone who cites Arnaiz-Villena loses some credibility because Arnaiz-Villena is a fringe academic.

    Jandacek also misspells Tyrrhenian as "Thyrrenian", and that even more tilts his article to the unprofessional section of humanities studies.

    That said, Jandacek's article does indeed present some novel views we should debate, but it has a Slavocentric agenda. I do not think proto-Slavic was at all synonymous with proto-Indo-European, but it could've been closer to proto-Indo-European than take say, Tocharian or Germanic.

    The problem with proto-Slavic is that the Slavic languages were recorded very late, unlike for example the Indo-Aryan and Indo-Iranian languages which were recorded much earlier in Sanskrit and Avestan. So we can't say for certain what proto-Slavic sounded like. The same can be said of proto-Celtic; the so called “Keltois” tribes didn't write down much of their culture and religion, but rather passed down their memes orally. So it's difficult to say anything certain about which and what language group of modern Indo-European is the closest to proto-Indo-European. It certainly isn't Slavic, but Slavic could be a better representative than most extant Indo-European languages, similar to how for example Icelandic isn't proto-Norse but certainly a more preserved, conservative insular Scandinavian dialect and much more similar to old Norse dialects than the contemporary continental Scandinavian languages.

    What the proto-Slavic equals proto-Indo-European hypothesis of Jandacek(?) has in its favour, is the much higher frequency and genetic variation of R-M17 in modern Slavic speakers, in comparison with Celtic, Germanic and Romance speaking populations. Like another ethnolinguistic group of Indo-European speakers with a high frequency and variation of R1a1a—the Indians—Slavic languages represent a Satem division of Indo-European. Moreover, Slavic languages are fairly close to the proto-Indo-European urheimat per the Kurgan hypothesis, and the spread of Y-DNA R1a1a is very much in line with Gimbutas' early take on the spread of Indo-European languages:

    “The term Old Europe is applied to a pre-Indo-European culture of Europe, a culture matrifocal and probably matrilinear, agricultural and sedentary, egalitarian and peaceful. It contrasted sharply with the ensuing Proto-Indo-European culture which was patriarchal, stratified, pastoral, mobile, and war-oriented, superimposed on all Europe, except the southern and western fringes, in the course of three waves of infiltration from the Russian steppes, between 4500 and 2500 BC. During and after this period the female deities, or more accurately the Goddess Creatrix in her many aspects, were largely replaced by the predominantly male divinities of the Indo-Europeans. What developed after c. 2500 BC was a melange of the two mythic systems, Old European and Indo-European.” — Marija Gimbutas, The Language of the Goddess, 1989a, cited in Aryan Idols, p. 289, ISBN 0226028607

    Now I know Gimbutas is controversial in the view of many Indo-Europeanists for various reasons, describing her as "ecofeminist" and so on, but consider her take on the spread of Indo-European culture with the spread of R-M17, and I dare say the distribution of R-M17 is nothing less than empirical evidence for her Kurgan hypothesis:



    That said, I do think proto-Slavic is a good contender as the most similar IE branch in comparison with proto-Indo-European. But it's not synonymous with proto-Indo-European because proto-Slavic like all Indo-European daughter languages represents a dialect change of PIE into its modern divisions, and this, Jandacek has failed to understand. And from reading David W. Anthony's The Horse, The Wheel and Language, I did get the impression that the Satem division was somehow a more archaic version of Indo-European than the Centum branch (which somehow to me sounds more modern). I'm no expert and I'm just a layman on the subject, but my view on Jandacek's article is that he has some highly speculative and controversial views.

    For example, he argues that proto-Indo-European (in his POV proto-Slavic) urheimat could be somewhere in Mesopotamia and that it was replaced there by language shift. The swastika has indeed been found in northern Mesopotamia during the Neo-Assyrian Empire, in Aššur of all places:

    Gods, demons, and symbols of ancient Mesopotamia: an illustrated dictionary, p. 171

    This is highly speculative but perhaps it could support Jandacek's POV.

    Anyway, I need to get ready for work. I'll discuss this later.
    Last edited by EliasAlucard; 2011-10-23 at 16:25. Reason: clarify, grammar
    ReactOS <--- support this project so that we can get rid of Windows!
    Ubuntu MATE 16.04.1 LTS | PRISM-Break! | Windows7sins

    “A wise man makes his own decisions; an ignorant man follows public opinion.” ― Chinese proverb

    “Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under.” ― H. L. Mencken

    “The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance.” ― Socrates

    “Damnant quod non intelligunt.” ― Latin proverb

    Quoted for truth:
    Quote Originally Posted by Alaron View Post
    Anatolian Urhemait supporters are mostly butthurt Meds.
    For the lulz:
    Quote Originally Posted by drgs View Post
    Poland is a misunderstanding. It is a country which lies on the frontier between western and slavic world, and which combines elements of both.
    In fact, they are not even the Europeans in strict sense, meaning European as in bearing the responsibility and understanding of European interests. Poland has always been an subordinate country, on one side sucking German dick, on the other side -- Russian one, some kind of "novice" europeans, who are full of inferiority complexes, hysteria and obsessity neuroses. This is also true for all Baltic countries

  5. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to EliasAlucard For This Useful Post:

    Pioterus (2011-09-27), Silesian (2011-10-04), voyager14 (2017-09-02), Wojewoda (2011-09-28), Yautja_BR (2011-11-12)

  6. #3
    Senior Moderator
    Plant of Life = Biological Magic 麻 EliasAlucard's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2009-10-22
    Posts
    14,607
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Y-DNA
    J1a2a1a2-P58+
    mtDNA
    H5a
    Race
    Caucasian
    Phenotype
    Alpinid
    Metaethnos
    proto-Semitic
    Ethnicity
    Assyrian/Armenian
    Politics
    Environment, Cannabis
    Religion
    Secular Agnostic
    Assyria Assyria 1913-1923 Armenia Lebanon Sweden Greece

    Default

    A few more points on Jandacek's hypothesis:

    1) Centum-Satem shouldn't be the main defining isogloss between the Indo-European languages; the Centum-Satem division is a good method but more words should be used, like for example, God, sky, cow, horse, metal, wheel, and so on and so forth. The Centum-Satem division may not correlate with other isoglosses, but it's an interesting division nonetheless. Jandacek says Centum-Satem "ought not be revered as a defining wedge", and "more and more linguists are following this view and cease to give gravity on this type of division" without giving an example of a linguist with this view, yet he himself puts much gravity on the Centum-Satem division and uses it as a case in point to argue proto-Slavic is the same as proto-Indo-European.

    2) That Slavic languages have maintained a high degree of intelligiblity is interesting, but it could be for entirely different reasons than an extremely conservative preservation of proto-Indo-European. Scandinavian languages with the exception of Icelandic have also maintained a high degree of intellibility. It could simply mean Slavic languages diverged later than other branches of Indo-European languages, or that Slavic peoples maintained a greater degree of contact with each other.

    3) I agree with Jandacek the term "Indo-Germanic" should be abandoned; this is nothing less than ethnocentrist Germans trying to aggrandise themselves in the intellectual discourse. I am however of the opinion that the language family shouldn't be called Indo-Slavic, proto-Slavic or anything Slavic really. Indo-European is the most neutral term. And neither should it be called Sanskrit-European or any other ethnonym found in India.

    4) Proto-Indo-European is estimated to be around 8,000 to 4,000 years old, and it's highly unlikely that proto-Slavic being around 1,400 years old (based on the earliest written records of a Slavic language; proto-Slavic is probably somewhat older than that), maintained an almost identical preservation of proto-Indo-European with very little change over the millennia without a written language. Written languages are known to evolve less rapidly due to the stabilising effect of writing on languages (words and grammar are remembered in the "memepool" much longer). No one would understand proto-Indo-European today, not even the Slavs.

    5) It's more proper to call the PIE language family, 'Anatolian-European' rather than proto-Slavic, because the Indo-Hittite hypothesis suggests Anatolian IE-languages are cousin languages to proto-Indo-European rather than daughter languages:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Hittite

    And since India isn't the urheimat of PIE and Anatolian is one of the oldest dialects of Indo-European (certainly older than Slavic), it's questionable why Slavic would be more proto-Indo-European than Hittite (and other extinct dialects of IE that never made it into written records).
    Last edited by EliasAlucard; 2011-09-28 at 12:18. Reason: Anatolian-European?
    ReactOS <--- support this project so that we can get rid of Windows!
    Ubuntu MATE 16.04.1 LTS | PRISM-Break! | Windows7sins

    “A wise man makes his own decisions; an ignorant man follows public opinion.” ― Chinese proverb

    “Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under.” ― H. L. Mencken

    “The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance.” ― Socrates

    “Damnant quod non intelligunt.” ― Latin proverb

    Quoted for truth:
    Quote Originally Posted by Alaron View Post
    Anatolian Urhemait supporters are mostly butthurt Meds.
    For the lulz:
    Quote Originally Posted by drgs View Post
    Poland is a misunderstanding. It is a country which lies on the frontier between western and slavic world, and which combines elements of both.
    In fact, they are not even the Europeans in strict sense, meaning European as in bearing the responsibility and understanding of European interests. Poland has always been an subordinate country, on one side sucking German dick, on the other side -- Russian one, some kind of "novice" europeans, who are full of inferiority complexes, hysteria and obsessity neuroses. This is also true for all Baltic countries

  7. #4
    Senior Moderator
    Plant of Life = Biological Magic 麻 EliasAlucard's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2009-10-22
    Posts
    14,607
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Y-DNA
    J1a2a1a2-P58+
    mtDNA
    H5a
    Race
    Caucasian
    Phenotype
    Alpinid
    Metaethnos
    proto-Semitic
    Ethnicity
    Assyrian/Armenian
    Politics
    Environment, Cannabis
    Religion
    Secular Agnostic
    Assyria Assyria 1913-1923 Armenia Lebanon Sweden Greece

    Default

    One thing I don't understand from Jandacek's hypothesis:

    The original [4] Core-Peripheral approach needs some revision. However, and in any case, the core languages remain to be the Slavic ones, whereas the Kentum languages are, in any case, peripheral. This is well in line with attempts to explain the Kentum effect by the involvement of Sudanic languages, Kafir languages in Hindukush, North Pamir languages, Caucasus languages, Tocharic, and Anatolic languages, cf. [2,3]. Indicative is also the statement of W. Jones expressed in 1786 that "the Gothick and the Celtick are blended with a very different idiom". The question persists: what would be his opinion if he had used also Slavic. Would he had thought that Slavic was blended with some other idiom - or would he think that Slavic was mostly unblended?
    How the hell did he get the notion that Centum is a product of Sudanic substratum?

    And his question about what idiom is important in understanding Indo-European languages, but that's not necessarily a blend of different idiom. I think what William Jones was saying, was that Greek and Latin are more similar with each other than either are with Celtic or Germanic languages, and in a way, Sanskrit is somehow more similar to Greek and Latin than Sanskrit is to Germanic or Celtic. I think that was William Jones' point. He probably would've considered Slavic a blend of different idiom too, but at the time Slavic wasn't even taken into consideration.

    The north European Indo-European languages are quite different from the south European ones.
    Last edited by EliasAlucard; 2011-10-04 at 22:18.
    ReactOS <--- support this project so that we can get rid of Windows!
    Ubuntu MATE 16.04.1 LTS | PRISM-Break! | Windows7sins

    “A wise man makes his own decisions; an ignorant man follows public opinion.” ― Chinese proverb

    “Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under.” ― H. L. Mencken

    “The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance.” ― Socrates

    “Damnant quod non intelligunt.” ― Latin proverb

    Quoted for truth:
    Quote Originally Posted by Alaron View Post
    Anatolian Urhemait supporters are mostly butthurt Meds.
    For the lulz:
    Quote Originally Posted by drgs View Post
    Poland is a misunderstanding. It is a country which lies on the frontier between western and slavic world, and which combines elements of both.
    In fact, they are not even the Europeans in strict sense, meaning European as in bearing the responsibility and understanding of European interests. Poland has always been an subordinate country, on one side sucking German dick, on the other side -- Russian one, some kind of "novice" europeans, who are full of inferiority complexes, hysteria and obsessity neuroses. This is also true for all Baltic countries

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to EliasAlucard For This Useful Post:

    Yautja_BR (2011-11-12)

  9. #5
    Established Member
    Infidel Snowman 2.8% Neanderthal
    Last Online
    2019-05-15 @ 20:23
    Join Date
    2009-10-23
    Posts
    1,242
    Location
    West Pretannia
    Gender
    Age
    68
    Y-DNA
    N1c1*
    mtDNA
    H4a1
    Race
    Europid
    Phenotype
    Lappid
    Metaethnos
    Reindeer follower
    Ethnicity
    Shellfish gatherer
    Phenotype
    Boreal
    Politics
    bottom right quadrant
    Religion
    property is freedom
    England Northern Ireland Norway Sweden Finland Sami

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    One thing I don't understand of Jandacek's hypothesis:

    How the hell did he get the notion that Centum is a product of Sudanic substratum?

    And his question about what idiom is important in understanding Indo-European languages, but that's not necessarily a blend of different idiom. I think what William Jones was saying, was that Greek and Latin are more similar with each other than either are with Celtic or Germanic languages, and in a way, Sanskrit is somehow more similar to Greek and Latin than Sanskrit is to Germanic or Celtic. I think that was William Jones' point. He probably would've considered Slavic a blend of different idiom too, but at the time Slavic wasn't even taken into consideration.

    The north European Indo-European languages are quite different from the south European ones.
    The celtic languages, especially the continental, are usually considered close to the latin with only a few shifts like [P] >[""], Julius Caesar wrote his battle reports in Greek because the Gauls could understand the Latin easily.
    Pre-proto-celtic with the [P]>[F] shift probably wafted north over the millennia to turn into proto-germanic, the first sound shift must have happened before it reached the NW littoral germanic birthplace as ingaevonic, saxon/franconian and scandi all have [P] else there'd have been no [P] for the second sound shift as franconian & saxon moved south & upwards to morph into the hochdeutsches.
    The slavonic languages have had 3 different palatalisations - regressive (like scandi & ingaevonic) & progressive like hochdeutsch - as I understand it palatalisation is a one-way street - [K]>[Ç]>[tsh]>[ts]>[S] doesn't reverse (I may be wrong) - so they're a long way from PIE.
    Quote Originally Posted by mary
    There was no poverty in the Soviet time. It was only in the 80's that it started to happen due to incompetent leadership. People in the Soviet Union lived better than Americans do today.

  10. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to OldPretan For This Useful Post:

    EliasAlucard (2011-10-04), Loxias (2011-10-11), Padre Organtino (2012-08-27), voyager14 (2017-09-02), Yautja_BR (2011-11-12)

  11. #6
    Established Member
    Junior Member EastPole's Avatar
    Last Online
    2016-07-20 @ 21:01
    Join Date
    2011-06-19
    Posts
    1,110
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    N1c1*
    mtDNA
    N1a1a
    Metaethnos
    Slavic
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Poland

    Default

    Old Pretan, please explain to me what do you mean by palatalisations which cause Slavic languages to be “long way from PIE”. Do it by explaining examples given in Wikipedia.

    PIE *wĺ̥kʷe 'wolf!' (vocative singular of *wĺ̥kʷos) > PSl. *wilke > OCS vlьče, Pol. wilcze, SCr. vȗče
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_...palatalization


    You can check Polish word ‘wilk’ – “wolf”:
    http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wilk
    In this wiktionary entrance you can also see declension of Polish ‘wilk’ as below:

    declension of wilk:
    ______ singular plural

    nominative wilk wilki

    genitive wilka wilków


    dative wilkowi wilkom


    accusative wilka wilki


    instrumental wilkiem wilkami



    locative wilku wilkach


    vocative wilku wilki
    Please explain to me what do you find in this declension that is “long way from PIE”. I think it is very close to PIE. Do you know examples of ‘wolf ‘ declensions in other IE languages that are closer? How about Celtic or Germanic?

    Another example from the same article in Wikipedia:

    The effect of the first palatalization is also evident on Germanic loanwords. Compare:
    • Germanic *helmaz 'helmet' > PSl. *xelmu > *šelmu > OCS šlěmъ, Russ. šelóm, SCr. šljȅm
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_...palatalization

    This is an obvious lie. You can see it by checking etymology dictionaries.



    Vladimir E. Orel “A Handbook of Germanic Etymology” 2003






    Winfred P. Lehmann “A Gothic Etymological Dictionary” 1997

    Please notice that there is no Germanic etymology for the word *helmaz. Presence of cognate forms in many Germanic languages indicates that it was borrowed before Proto-Germanic split. The question is where was it borrowed from.

    You can see in examples given above that a cognate Sanskrit word exists : 'śarma'.
    If you are interested in linguistics you probably know that Indo-Iranian languages switched pie.'l' > 'r'. So words with 'l' are older. If you don't know it you can read about it here:
    http://books.google.com/books?id=vo_...0l.%22&f=false

    or here:
    http://books.google.com/books?id=_kn...d%20*l&f=false


    It follows that Slavic words "šalma/šałma/šolma etc" are older and more archaic than sanskrit "śarma'. So we have Slavic 'šalma' > Sanskrit 'śarma'.

    There is also cognate Thracian word 'zalmos' also borrowed from Slavic.

    Above words are Slavic because as you can see above in Winfred P. Lehmann w “A Gothic Etymological Dictionary” 1997 Lithuanian 'šalmas' also was borrowed from Slavic.

    Slavic and Indo-Iranic languages separated 2000-2500 BC or maybe even earlier. Slavic 'śalma' did exist at that time and from this form Sanskrit ‘śarma’ evolved later by ‘l’ > ‘r’ replacement. It couldn't have been borrowed from Germanic as such languages didn't exist yet.

    In Slavic languages 'k'/'g' are interchanged with 's'/'z' very often for example in Polish 'kłania'/'słania' are cognate. This is not a sound shift but normal word formation process.
    'šalma'/'chełm'/'charm' and other related words are not borrowed but Slavic.

    Correct etymology in Wikipedia should be then:

    Germanic *helmaz 'helmet' < Slavic *xelmu <*šelmu
    or

    Germanic *helmaz 'helmet' < Slavic *šelmu
    As many linguists noticed Slavic languages are very conservative and close to PIE because Slavs never left PIE homeland. Other languages like Hittite, Greek, Celtic or Germanic were very much influenced by not-IE substratum. That was the cause of hybridization and that’s why they are far from PIE.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to EastPole For This Useful Post:

    Pioterus (2011-10-05)

  13. #7
    Established Member
    Junior Member Heladageniskogen's Avatar
    Last Online
    2014-02-07 @ 17:41
    Join Date
    2011-09-21
    Posts
    249
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    R1a1a
    mtDNA
    H23
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    Germanic
    Ethnicity
    Swedish/Norwegian
    Politics
    Ethnic Nationalism
    Religion
    Science
    Sweden Norway Germany Austria Netherlands

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    That Slavic languages have maintained a high degree of intelligiblity is interesting, but it could be for entirely different reasons than an extremely conservative preservation of proto-Indo-European. Scandinavian languages with the exception of Icelandic have also maintained a high degree of intellibility. It could simply mean Slavic languages diverged later than other branches of Indo-European languages, or that Slavic peoples maintained a greater degree of contact with each other.
    I am quite convinced people spoke a great variety of Balto-Slavic languages in eastern Europe that eventually got replaced by a certain Balto-Slavic language that evolved into what we now call Slavic languages. A bit like various other Semitic languages got replaced by Aramean/Arabic. I think its fairly easy for people to shift to a language in the same language group, germanic speaking immigrants in America switched from their native language to English much faster than people from other native language families did. So I bet it has happened a lot during history with sister languages being "absorbed" by another sister language.

    I did get the impression that the Satem division was somehow a more archaic version of Indo-European than the Centum branch (which somehow to me sounds more modern)
    The weird thing is the geographic spread of the Centum branch, its enclosing the Satem ones in a circle. I read somewhere it was suggested that the Cetum ones retained some archaisms because of their isolation from the central zone and the various soundshifts goings on there.




    Also, as far as I am concerned Baltic languages are considered more archaic than Slavic. Think it would be more correct to talk about them or at least "Balto-Slavic" languages in general rather than just Slavic.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_...pean_languages

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Heladageniskogen For This Useful Post:

    EliasAlucard (2011-10-04), Loxias (2011-10-11), Padre Organtino (2012-08-27)

  15. #8
    Senior Moderator
    Plant of Life = Biological Magic 麻 EliasAlucard's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2009-10-22
    Posts
    14,607
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Y-DNA
    J1a2a1a2-P58+
    mtDNA
    H5a
    Race
    Caucasian
    Phenotype
    Alpinid
    Metaethnos
    proto-Semitic
    Ethnicity
    Assyrian/Armenian
    Politics
    Environment, Cannabis
    Religion
    Secular Agnostic
    Assyria Assyria 1913-1923 Armenia Lebanon Sweden Greece

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OldPretan View Post
    The celtic languages, especially the continental, are usually considered close to the latin with only a few shifts like [P] >[""], Julius Caesar wrote his battle reports in Greek because the Gauls could understand the Latin easily.
    Pre-proto-celtic with the [P]>[F] shift probably wafted north over the millennia to turn into proto-germanic, the first sound shift must have happened before it reached the NW littoral germanic birthplace as ingaevonic, saxon/franconian and scandi all have [P] else there'd have been no [P] for the second sound shift as franconian & saxon moved south & upwards to morph into the hochdeutsches.
    The slavonic languages have had 3 different palatalisations - regressive (like scandi & ingaevonic) & progressive like hochdeutsch - as I understand it palatalisation is a one-way street - [K]>[Ç]>[tsh]>[ts]>[S] doesn't reverse (I may be wrong) - so they're a long way from PIE.
    Yes, I'm aware of the Celto-Italic linguistic affinities.

    But my point was that when William Jones discovered the Indo-European languages, he didn't know much about continental Celtic, he was if he knew some Celtic probably more familiar with the insular Celtic of Britain, and both insular Celtic and Germanic languages sound quite different from Latin and Greek. Latin and Greek have had a lot of language contact and shared cultural history, so they're obviously more connected.

    So that's probably why Jones thought of Celtic and Germanic as a blend of different idiom. That doesn't mean they actually were different idioms, but that was just his perception as a layman (because that's what he was at the time; more skilled Indo-Europeanists have studied the language family since his time).

    Quote Originally Posted by Heladageniskogen View Post
    I am quite convinced people spoke a great variety of Balto-Slavic languages in eastern Europe that eventually got replaced by a certain Balto-Slavic language that evolved into what we now call Slavic languages. A bit like various other Semitic languages got replaced by Aramean/Arabic. I think its fairly easy for people to shift to a language in the same language group, germanic speaking immigrants in America switched from their native language to English much faster than people from other native language families did. So I bet it has happened a lot during history with sister languages being "absorbed" by another sister language.
    Yes, I've been saying for years now on Flashback in various Arabisation debates that the spread of Arabic was facilitated by the close relatedness of Aramic in the Middle East, and if you look at the patterns of the Arabic language, it pretty much only replaced other Afro-Asiatic languages; Arabic did not replace regions with Indo-European languages such as Iran and Anatolia. Mostly the lingua franca of the Middle East, Aramaic, Egyptian and Berber languages were replaced. It's very likely because these languages were more similar to Arabic than Persian or Greek.

    Likewise, the Akkadian language spoken by Assyrians, an east Semitic language, was replaced by the Assyrians themselves with Aramaic, which happens to be west Semitic.

    So language replacement does follow a predictable pattern in that languages shift easier to other other closely related languages. It is very possible that Baltic and Slavic followed a similar replacement pattern before Europeans began recording the north-eastern European languages.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heladageniskogen View Post
    The weird thing is the geographic spread of the Centum branch, its enclosing the Satem ones in a circle. I read somewhere it was suggested that the Cetum ones retained some archaisms because of their isolation from the central zone and the various soundshifts goings on there.
    Based on the reconstruction of proto-Indo-European, the Centum branch has some interesting evolution in change of vocabulary. I can't remember the exact spelling, but “head” had some very interesting and quite radical shift in Germanic compared with Satem branches, I'll have to look it up again.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heladageniskogen View Post
    Also, as far as I am concerned Baltic languages are considered more archaic than Slavic.
    How so? By the way, look at how the Balts pronounce hundred, Šimtas (Lithuanian; Baltic) sounds very archaic to me, almost like a Semitic language, whereas other Indo-European languages are Centum or Satem, which seems more refined to me, and less heavy on the consonants and more tonal.

    Also, Šimtas is supposed to be Satem, but it sounds more like somewhere in between Satem and Centum.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heladageniskogen View Post
    Think it would be more correct to talk about them or at least "Balto-Slavic" languages in general rather than just Slavic.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_...pean_languages
    That's a good point.
    Last edited by EliasAlucard; 2011-10-04 at 23:25. Reason: Heladageniskogen, correction of šimtas
    ReactOS <--- support this project so that we can get rid of Windows!
    Ubuntu MATE 16.04.1 LTS | PRISM-Break! | Windows7sins

    “A wise man makes his own decisions; an ignorant man follows public opinion.” ― Chinese proverb

    “Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under.” ― H. L. Mencken

    “The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance.” ― Socrates

    “Damnant quod non intelligunt.” ― Latin proverb

    Quoted for truth:
    Quote Originally Posted by Alaron View Post
    Anatolian Urhemait supporters are mostly butthurt Meds.
    For the lulz:
    Quote Originally Posted by drgs View Post
    Poland is a misunderstanding. It is a country which lies on the frontier between western and slavic world, and which combines elements of both.
    In fact, they are not even the Europeans in strict sense, meaning European as in bearing the responsibility and understanding of European interests. Poland has always been an subordinate country, on one side sucking German dick, on the other side -- Russian one, some kind of "novice" europeans, who are full of inferiority complexes, hysteria and obsessity neuroses. This is also true for all Baltic countries

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to EliasAlucard For This Useful Post:

    Heladageniskogen (2011-10-04)

  17. #9
    Established Member
    Junior Member Heladageniskogen's Avatar
    Last Online
    2014-02-07 @ 17:41
    Join Date
    2011-09-21
    Posts
    249
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    R1a1a
    mtDNA
    H23
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    Germanic
    Ethnicity
    Swedish/Norwegian
    Politics
    Ethnic Nationalism
    Religion
    Science
    Sweden Norway Germany Austria Netherlands

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    Based on the reconstruction of proto-Indo-European, the Centum branch has some interesting evolution in change of vocabulary. I can't remember the exact spelling, but head had some very interesting and quite radical shift in Germanic compared with Satem branches, I'll have to look it up again.
    That is true for sure, but I can't really grasp how the hell the shift and the spread occurred. Why is the most eastern IE language related to the most western.

    Maybe tocharian evolved convergent and its just a coincidence its close to western IE languages?

    How so? By the way, look at how the Balts pronounce hundred, Šimtas (Lithuanian; Baltic) sounds very archaic to me, almost like a Semitic language, whereas other Indo-European languages are Centum or Satem, which seems more refined to me, and less heavy on the consonants and more tonal.

    Also, Šimtas is supposed to be Satem, but it sounds more like somewhere in between Satem and Centum.
    It seems most linguists have that opinion about Baltic languages. Makes sense historically as well seeing the Baltic countries have been VERY isolated.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuan...ean_vocabulary

    Listen to this example of reconstructed old Prussian (west Baltic), does it not sound quite ancient and close to other archaic IE languages (Sanskrit for example)? Maybe I just imagine but it certainly feels like that.

    Words like "Vasaram" "Deivas" and so fourth.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pxW760_EEA

    Wonderful language nevertheless.
    Last edited by Heladageniskogen; 2011-10-05 at 00:19.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Heladageniskogen For This Useful Post:

    EliasAlucard (2011-10-04)

  19. #10
    Established Member
    Junior Member Jaska's Avatar
    Last Online
    2016-12-19 @ 18:55
    Join Date
    2010-06-26
    Posts
    1,472
    Location
    Tuusula
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    N1c1
    mtDNA
    H5a1e
    Metaethnos
    Uralic
    Ethnicity
    Finn
    Phenotype
    Fallen angel
    Politics
    ...sucks
    Religion
    Very own
    Finland

    Default

    Proto-Slavic is not very close to Proto-Indo-European:
    PIE *ḱmtom > Late Middle Slavic *syta ‘100’

    There is a huge amount of changes from PIE to Proto-Slavic:
    http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art066e.pdf

    Of the Balto-Slavic branches, Baltic is generally considered much more conservative than Slavic, both phonologically and morphologically.

    Some points:
    - The areal centrality cannot testify for linguistic conservativity.
    - The assumption that PIE speakers could have had a lineage which is most frequent in Slavs cannot testify for linguistic conservativeness.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heladageniskogen
    That is true for sure, but I can't really grasp how the hell the shift and the spread occurred. Why is the most eastern IE language related to the most western.
    Maybe tocharian evolved convergent and its just a coincidence its close to western IE languages?
    It does not seem possible, because Tocharian shares the development *ḱ > *k with the other centum-languages. And the satemization is considered areally spread, because it is seen in Aryan, Balto-Slavic and possibly Armenian, although Balto-Slavic derives from Northwest-Indo-European. So it seems that the centum-languages spread first to a wider area, and only later did the “central” = satem-languages spread.

    Satemization:
    PIE palatalized *ḱ > *ś in Proto-Balto-Slavic, and further > *š in Baltic and *s in Slavic; PIE *ḱ > *ć in Proto-Aryan, and further > *c (> *s) in Iranian and > *ś in Indo-Aryan.

  20. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Jaska For This Useful Post:

    EliasAlucard (2011-10-05), Hweinlant (2011-10-05), OldPretan (2011-10-06), Vadim Verenich (2011-10-05)

Page 1 of 55 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Phenotype of the Proto-Indo-Europeans
    By Hue-man in forum Physical Anthropology
    Replies: 209
    Last Post: 2018-07-13, 16:03
  2. Mongoloid Proto-Indo-Europeans
    By Hweinlant in forum Urheimat Theories
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 2017-09-01, 19:23
  3. Proto-Indo-European
    By Sevastopol in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 2017-09-01, 18:48
  4. Proto Indo European nouns
    By Ubirajara in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: 2014-01-15, 05:41
  5. Proto-Indo-European archeogenetic sites
    By Polako in forum General Genetics Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2011-05-18, 17:58

Posting Permissions

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