User Tag List

Page 26 of 26 FirstFirst ... 16 24 25 26
Results 251 to 258 of 258

Thread: Genetic origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans (Lazaridis et al. 2017)348 days old

  1. #251
    Senior Moderator
    Plant of Life = Biological Magic 麻 EliasAlucard's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2009-10-22
    Posts
    14,208
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    33
    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 Arch Hades View Post
    Why is the Anthony and Ringe 2015 tree make more sense to me than the earlier one from Warnow 2013 you posted? Because it has Germanic a cousin to Balto-Slavic. The one you posted has Greek and Armenian a cousin to Balto Slavic and Germanic alone. Given the geographical proximity of Balto-Slavic and Germanic it's pretty obvious which one is more accurate. A phylogenetic tree which has Greco-Armenian one one side and then Balto-Slavic and Germanic on the other makes a lot more sense than a phylogenetic tree that has Germanic on one side all alone, and then Greco-Armenian and Balto-Slavic on another.
    That's like saying Tocharian should be closer related to Indo-Iranian than to proto-Anatolian, because Tocharians and Scythians were neighbors, or that Celtic should be closer to Germanic than to Italic, and so on.

    Of course linguistic affinity isn't determined by geography in that sense. Otherwise Greek would be more related to Italic than to Armenian and Indo-Iranian

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    BTW i have been using the reply with quote button.
    If so you've been intentionally removing the username from the quote tags in almost every single post you've quoted. What's the purpose of doing that? You do understand that if you quote someone without including their username, he won't get a notification and he won't necessarily see your post in a long and active thread. So it's stupid to remove the quote tags, unless you don't want a reply or something. This is lowbrow behavior.

    It's also important to include the forum post's number in your quote, so that other members can backtrack to the original post. Stop posting like an iGnorant iDiot.
    Last edited by EliasAlucard; 2018-03-01 at 16:42.
    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

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

  3. #252
    Established Member
    Junior Member Arch Hades's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:02
    Join Date
    2012-02-28
    Posts
    1,011
    Gender
    Age
    31
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    White American
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Phenotype
    Pompeii frescoe
    Politics
    I don't do politics
    Religion
    Panentheism
    Germany Japan Italy

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    That's like saying Tocharian should be closer related to Indo-Iranian than to proto-Anatolian, because Tocharians and Scythians were neighbors, or that Celtic should be closer to Germanic than to Italic, and so on.

    Of course linguistic affinity isn't determined by geography in that sense. Otherwise Greek would be more related to Italic than to Armenian and Indo-Iranian

    If so you've been intentionally removing the username from the quote tags in almost every single post you've quoted. What's the purpose of doing that? You do understand that if you quote someone without including their username, he won't get a notification and he won't necessarily see your post in a long and active thread. So it's stupid to remove the quote tags, unless you don't want a reply or something. This is lowbrow behavior.

    It's also important to include the forum post's number in your quote, so that other members can backtrack to the original post. Stop posting like an iGnorant iDiot.
    Tocharian IS more related to Indo-Iranian than it is to proto Anatolia. Most linguists have Anatolian on one side, all other branches including Tocharian on the other. And all the phylogenic trees posted in the last few pages on this thread show that. And Greek is closer geographically closer to Armenia than to Northern Italic languages. Since proto Italic is believed to be related to Celtic, Proto Italic probably formed in the Padania area. Also I don't see how Germanic languages were ever closer geographic ally closer to Celtic than to Slavic. Though I suppose u are right in some sense because of Anatolian's distinct place on the IE phylogenic tree. So geographical proximity compared to ancestral phylogeny is not some absolute law. Anyway this discussion is kinda pointless at this point cause no one really knows. It seems to me the the linguists are only near certain about a few concepts (like Greco-Armenian, Italo-Celtic, Balto-Slavic...and Anatolian being distinct from all others. Other concepts are much less certain.

  4. #253
    Senior Moderator
    Plant of Life = Biological Magic 麻 EliasAlucard's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2009-10-22
    Posts
    14,208
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    33
    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 Arch Hades View Post
    Tocharian IS more related to Indo-Iranian than it is to proto Anatolia.


    For sure it's not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Most linguists have Anatolian on one side, all other branches including Tocharian on the other.
    I think you're misreading those trees. They always have Anatolian first, and Tocharian second, because they can say with certainty, those two branches are the first to split from PIE.

    Here's a relatively accurate tree showing Tocharian closer to not only Hittite, but also to Greek, than to Indo-Iranian:



    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    And all the phylogenic trees posted in the last few pages on this thread show that.
    No they don't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    And Greek is closer geographically closer to Armenia than to Northern Italic languages.
    What's "northern Italic languages", French? And that might have been true in the past when Greek was spoken in Anatolia, but Greece is quite close to Sicily and Calabria.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Also I don't see how Germanic languages were ever closer geographic ally closer to Celtic than to Slavic.
    Germany and Gaul were neighbors. And many linguists think Germanic and Albanian are very closely related, and not only is Germanic geographically closer to Baltic and Slavic, but Slavic is geographically closer to Albanian. So your geography determines linguistic affinity hypothesis, makes no sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Though I suppose u are right in some sense because of Anatolian's distinct place on the IE phylogenic tree. So geographical proximity compared to ancestral phylogeny is not some absolute law.
    Of course I'm right, and only the original geography mattered, from where these proto-branches split off from (i.e., the PIE urheimat in Yamnaya, or Corded Ware). So obviously, Texas English is going to be closer to American English in general, than to Australian English, so in some cases, geography might matter. But the proto-branches were like, various colonies here and there, and some went south, others east and so on. Tocharian is closer to Celtic (and Italic) than it is to Indo-Iranian:



    ^^ This is probably because proto-Tocharian either started from the same group who later evolved/developed proto-Italo-Celtic (meaning, original geography was to some extent relevant), or because proto-Italo-Celtic split in a time span when all PIE dialects were closer to proto-Tocharian.

    That's basically what a language family is: the age of a dialect offshoot, reflects the language spoken in that time. This is why Icelandic is closer to Old Norse than Swedish, Danish and Norwegian, because Icelandic split from the continental Scandinavia languages like a millennia ago, when Norse was spoken.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Anyway this discussion is kinda pointless at this point cause no one really knows.
    You're wrong as usual

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    It seems to me the the linguists are only near certain about a few concepts (like Greco-Armenian, Italo-Celtic, Balto-Slavic...and Anatolian being distinct from all others. Other concepts are much less certain.
    So anyway, where do you think the Steppe admixture in the Mycenaeans came from, Corded Ware or Yamnaya?
    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 User Says Thank You to EliasAlucard For This Useful Post:

    Targum (2018-03-05)

  6. #254
    Established Member
    Junior Member Arch Hades's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:02
    Join Date
    2012-02-28
    Posts
    1,011
    Gender
    Age
    31
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    White American
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Phenotype
    Pompeii frescoe
    Politics
    I don't do politics
    Religion
    Panentheism
    Germany Japan Italy

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post


    For sure it's not.

    I think you're misreading those trees. They always have Anatolian first, and Tocharian second, because they can say with certainty, those two branches are the first to split from PIE.

    Here's a relatively accurate tree showing Tocharian closer to not only Hittite, but also to Greek, than to Indo-Iranian:

    Learn how to read a dendrogram and a phylogenetic tree you nincompoop. There's no excuse for a guy in his 30s who's own forum is called 'ForumBiodiversity' not to know how to understand these elementary conceptualizations. That tree shows Hittite all alone, and all other IE languages including Tocharian more related to one another than to Hittite. And it also show Greek more related to Indo-Iranian than Greek is to Tocharian.

    So anyway, where do you think the Steppe admixture in the Mycenaeans came from, Corded Ware or Yamnaya?
    Directly/Immediately from neither. Indirectly/ultimately for certain from Yamnaya or something like it. It possibly could have come indirectly from Corded Ware too but I'm not sure.
    Last edited by Arch Hades; 2018-03-01 at 19:47.

  7. #255
    Established Member
    Junior Member Arch Hades's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:02
    Join Date
    2012-02-28
    Posts
    1,011
    Gender
    Age
    31
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    White American
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Phenotype
    Pompeii frescoe
    Politics
    I don't do politics
    Religion
    Panentheism
    Germany Japan Italy

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post

    You're wrong as usual
    What am I wrong about? About this discussion being pointless or that no one knows all the details of the phylogenetic history of Indo-European?

    I said that there are certain concepts linguists are fairly certain about...for instance Greco-Armenian, Balto-Slavic, and Italo-Celtic, or that Anatolian is distinct from all other branches and forms it's own branch that split off from the other brances first.

    Other concepts are much more cloudy and up for debate that no one knows for certain. Like for instance what mega group Greco-Armenian, or Germanic, or Balto-Slavic, or Indo-Iranian, and Tocharian could belong to. The last few pages of this thread show There's no point in arguing that at the moment because all the phylogenetic trees posted in this thread contradict one another or tell slightly different stories. Nothing wrong with saying something is unknown.

    And many linguists think Germanic and Albanian are very closely related,
    Any many other linguists do not, apparently. One of the trees you posted in your last reply has Greek and Armenian closest to Albanian [Tosk and Arvanitika].
    Last edited by Arch Hades; 2018-03-02 at 04:49.

  8. #256
    Regular Member
    Junior Member
    Last Online
    2018-05-07 @ 15:41
    Join Date
    2017-08-08
    Posts
    24
    Gender

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    I don't think it's the case that Armenia acquired southern ancestry, it's just that Armenians have been largely the same for thousands of years; the Indo-European speaking proto-Armenians didn't leave much admixture in Urartu. Y-DNA and mtDNA haplogroups among Armenians and Assyrians are almost identical, with Armenians having two Y-DNA lineages that Assyrians lack: E-V13 (or some other Balkan E1b clade, can't remember exactly), and I believe I2 or maybe I1, something like that, also from Balkan. Peter Hrechdakian was talking about this years ago. But other than that, identical haplogroups between Armenians and Assyrians, and autosomal DNA is also almost identical between Armenians and Assyrians, with Armenians having slightly more of the northern European component. So this points to Armenians having received their Indo-European language from the Balkans, through an elite dominance scenario. Which makes sense if Greek and Armenian are closely related IE languages.
    At least in nMonte with Global25, Armenia_MLBA seems to model well as Armenia_EBA + something steppe. Something ancient Balkan-like doesn't work nearly as well. So either the scenario of a migration via the Balkans is more improbable or a population still very high in steppe moved to Armenia from the Balkans without much further mixing in the Balkans. As for a migration via the Caucasus, it's also quite likely that Armenia_EBA-like populations (with perhaps even more EHG-like ancestry) lived in the North Caucasus at the time too, so the similarity of Armenia_MLBA to North Caucasians might just an 'accidental' result of similar ancestries coming together. Both scenaria seem to have their pros and cons from an autosomal perspective at least.

    The R1b-Z2103 in both Armenians and the Balkans is easier to explain and doesn't necessarily argue for a Balkan migration. The E-V13 is more interesting but I still kinda wonder if it won't end up being an early Indo-European(ized) farmer lineage close to the steppe too, which would complicate things about the Armenian one. But I'm not a huge Y-DNA guy, so you might want to ask Duwa for specifics here.

    What does seem to be the case is that Armenians are broadly more similar to Armenia_EBA than Armenia_MLBA, which had excess steppe ancestry, overall. Another thing that seems to be the case is that, compared to Armenia BA in general, modern Armenians seem to have more Levantine-like ancestry which to me implies admixture with more southern populations. This doesn't seem particularly weird, neighbors are going to end up exchanging genes to an extent even if something large-scale isn't involved. Modern Assyrians seem to have a small amount of steppe ancestry too after all, no single group is hermetically sealed. But more extensive sampling will answer these subtler questions.

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    Not sure your explanation is convincing enough. Given proto-Greek's close relationship to Indo-Iranian, I think it's reasonable that proto-Greek shares some early satem developments. Also, hekotón is the Arcadocypriot dialect; the ancient and modern Greek words for hundred is hekatón and ekató. That's beside the point though. The point is, ancient Greek (and I assume proto-Greek?) had lost the N before the T, which is the case with Indo-Iranian too. That proto-Balto-Slavic and Baltic/Lithuanian still has the M preserved, well that's that branch, but Greek is closer to Indo-Iranian than to Balto-Slavic anyway.
    As I said, I get your general point but in fairness, I think part of the reason you don't find my explanation "convincing enough" is because your mind seems a bit too stuck on "satem/centum, Corded Ware" without considering anything else. Obviously Greek shows many innovations common with some of the satemized branches (namely Indo-Iranian), as everyone agrees, which must imply their being "together" until relatively late, but this particular innovation has nothing to do with satemization itself. That's exactly why I told you the innovation you were talking about was something different and that it doesn't seem shared with Balto-Slavic either which also shares some other innovations with Indo-Iranian that neither share with Greek. Another thing to keep in mind, which I'm sure you already know, is that there are ancient less well-attested branches like Phrygian, for which both satem and centum classifications have been argued, that seem potentially even closer to Greek than Indo-Iranian is. Then you have others even less well-attested ones like Thracian and Dacian and the geographical space linking all those IE languages becomes very convoluted - Greek might not have been particularly geographically close to Indo-Iranian and the 'core' satem area in the first place, it just looks like it due to dialectal levelling and language extinction.

    And, yeah, my point about hekoton was just about proto-Greek likely developing a schwa rather than directly an "a" from m̥, since "o" is reflected in some branches rather than "a". Modern Greek obviously has ekato(n) since it's the descendant of Attic. Just take it as extra, random info on the topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    You saying proto-Greek could have arrived to Greece from the Andronovo culture? Sounds a bit far-fetched. Why that far? Are you thinking of Z93?
    It was a bit tongue-in-cheek (and mind, Z93 appears as west as Srubnaya at that time, ignoring the one ancient Balkan Z93 we have now, which I'll honestly doubt is connected to Greek itself in any way until we actually get ancient Greek remains that show it at decently high frequencies) due to the various influences Middle and Late Helladic Greece seems to have with the relevant IE-related areas, from the Danube to the steppe to the Caucasus. My basic point is that it's hard to know anything really specific right now. Archaeologists have been arguing over this matter for ages so the idea that we can solve it definitively right now with the sparse sampling we currently have is obviously a non-starter.

    Also speaking of Z93, there have been less commonly accepted/argued for theories about the Shaft Graves princes being a Middle Helladic Indo-Iranian adstratum on top of an already Greek-speaking population, which would have been the result of proto-Greek speakers arriving at the end of the Early Helladic II. Under that scenario, basically those Indo-Iranian speakers would have enacted their temporary rule, and potentially some linguistic influence, and eventually would have been absorbed by the Greek-speaking locals. If we end up finding, say, both Z93 and Z2103 in Mycenaean and Archaic Greece, we might want to re-evaluate those scenaria unless a simpler "the proto-Greeks likely had both" is accepted.

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    So you're saying Greek maybe descending from the Bell Beaker culture, was eastern Beaker?
    It's half my being lazy and half my forgetting half of this stuff to answer you concretely here but look into some of Heyd's or Maran's papers on academia.edu for example. They're a treasure trove of info on the relevant relations, including the ones with the Near Eastern movement that brought this extra Caucasus we see in the ancient Balkans and Italy.
    Last edited by DDBG; 2018-03-02 at 08:14.

  9. #257
    Wiki Editor
    Moderator
    Your favourite (((Skype))) Semitic Duwa's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2010-02-26
    Posts
    3,387
    Location
    In your closet
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    J1-Z18271 (YSC234+)
    mtDNA
    J1c5
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    (((Skype))) + British
    Ethnicity
    (((Shasu of Yhw)))
    Politics
    Pump & Trump
    Religion
    Jehovah's Fitness
    Israel Israel Star of David Israel Israel

    Default

    I think some of you here should really pay attention to the data that has been released recently (from Mathieson and Olalde's last studies), some of it is potentially relevant to the Indo-Europeanisation of Greece.


    Quote Originally Posted by MnM View Post
    Morocco is a western lapdog.
    Quote Originally Posted by NonFingo View Post
    Those Bronze Age samples are just red herrings to distract you from the actual arrivals of populations with Semitic ancestry. Don’t take the bait by focusing on the wrong samples, lol. He is passing off Bronze Age Levantines with no evidence of strong predynastic input, as “Semites“. This way, he can flip it around and say Proto-Semitic speakers and predynastics were more or less identical to the Bronze Age Levantines sampled so far.
    Quote Originally Posted by NonFingo View Post
    @Semitic Duwa

    Wonder what the resident Proto-Semite has to say about this. I thought unmixed Egyptians were supposed to be Abusir with less/zero Chl?

    In your view, does this prove you wrong, or is it just a coincidence () that M1 is absent in one of the three subsamples from Abusir, and rare overall?

    And don’t change your signature now, please. I’m looking forward to you looking more and more incompetent as more aDNA is published. Wish there was a way to speed this up. But the extra wait and seeing you with your pants down every day, kinda has its own appeal, too.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Semitic Duwa For This Useful Post:

    Power77 (2018-03-05)

  11. #258
    Established Member
    Junior Member Arch Hades's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:02
    Join Date
    2012-02-28
    Posts
    1,011
    Gender
    Age
    31
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    White American
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Phenotype
    Pompeii frescoe
    Politics
    I don't do politics
    Religion
    Panentheism
    Germany Japan Italy

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Semitic Duwa View Post
    I think some of you here should really pay attention to the data that has been released recently (from Mathieson and Olalde's last studies), some of it is potentially relevant to the Indo-Europeanisation of Greece.
    What studies? Mathieson's 'Genetic History of Southeastern Europe' didnt even have Greek genomes. Had a few genomes from Neolithic Greece though.

Page 26 of 26 FirstFirst ... 16 24 25 26

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 2017-09-05, 22:43
  2. A genetic study of Jamaica's West African origins
    By jonboyclem in forum Americas
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 2017-01-05, 21:31
  3. The genetic structure of the world’s first farmers (Lazaridis 2016)
    By Wojewoda in forum General Genetics Discussion
    Replies: 353
    Last Post: 2016-11-04, 21:29
  4. Making sense of genetic origins - help?
    By ben89b in forum Member Results
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2014-11-07, 13:13
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 2011-06-21, 13:23

Posting Permissions

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