Page 241 of 241 FirstFirst ... 141191231239240241
Results 2,401 to 2,404 of 2404

Thread: Le Grenier indo-européen

  1. #2401
    Registered Users
    Posts
    868
    Sex
    Location
    Bretagne
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-DF27-FGC23071
    mtDNA (M)
    T1a1

    France Bretagne France France Bretagne Kroaz Du
    Oui, c'est sans doute là, la confusion. Moi j'ai pris cette question au sens culturel.

  2. #2402
    Registered Users
    Posts
    350
    Sex
    Location
    Western France
    Nationality
    French
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-Y13432

    France
    Quote Originally Posted by anglesqueville View Post
    J'avoue ne pas comprendre. La question posée par l'op du fil de discussion était une question de linguistique. Après tout, "Celtic from the West" est un livre (trois en fait) édité par un linguiste pour défendre une théorie linguistique. Le tort était peut-être d'ouvrir ce fil ailleurs que sur le forum de linguistique, mais cette erreur a été vite réparée. Au passage, si j'ai posté sur ce fil des modèles qpAdm, c'était une fantaisie, voire une provocation, et j'aurais été bien embêté si quelqu'un m'avait reproché de faire du hors-sujet, parce qu'en fait j'aurais été d'accord. Quant à vos histoires d'"idéologie", de "nativisme" britannique ou qq chose comme ça, j'avoue n'avoir rien vu de tel, mais j'ai peut-être, ou sans doute, été un peu distrait.
    Linux: je suis bien content que tu aies choisi Ubuntu. Ma seule expérience avec cette distrib date des toute premières versions, autant dire que j'ai oublié. Comme j'ai finalement opté pour Ubuntu pour mon nouveau système, qui est annoncé pour la fin du mois, je pourrai profiter de ton expérience. Mais tous ceux à qui j'ai demandé (dont David) m'ont dit qu'admixtools s'installait sans souci dessus.
    Moi non plus, je n'ai rien ressenti de tel, au contraire, je les trouve plutôt larges d'esprit et ouverts à toute éventualité.
    Last edited by jstephan; 07-01-2020 at 04:46 PM.

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jstephan For This Useful Post:

     anglesqueville (07-01-2020),  Trelvern (07-02-2020)

  4. #2403
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,217
    Sex
    Location
    French Flanders
    Ethnicity
    Northwestern European
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b L21>DF13
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a29a

    France Belgium Flanders Wallonia Occitania France Bretagne
    Quote Originally Posted by jstephan View Post
    Moi non plus, je n'ai rien ressenti de tel, au contraire, je les trouve plutôt larges d'esprit et ouverts à toute éventualité.
    Je suis navré, mais l'impression que j'ai, peut-être car il s'agit d'un thème récurrent, c'est qu'Alan et quelques autres restent plus ou moins liés à l'idée que les Celtes sont originaires de l'Ouest (lire les Iles Britanniques), notamment du fait du peu de changement génétique notamment en Irlande. Ce qui d'un point de vue culturel (donc linguistique), n'a pas beaucoup de sens.

    Alan a été beaucoup plus véhément dans d'autres fils, mais il n'en reste pas moins qu'il y a un problème de bonne foi. Il se laisse dominer par ses intuitions ou ses désirs, car il y a un vrai problème de cohérence. Quelques exemples: dans un post, il dit qu'au moins Hallstatt D a des éléments celtiques, donc c'était probablement des Celtes, dans d'autres, il le nie farouchement. Dans certains posts, les langues Celtiques ont émergées pendant l'Age du Bronze, mais dans d'autres, il évoque les liens commerciaux des princes d'Hallstatt D (Age du Fer) pour indiquer que le proto-Celte n'ayant pas eu d'influence d'autre groupes linguistiques, le proto-Celte ne pouvait pas être leur langue. Comme le proto-Celte était alors éteint depuis un bon moment, l'argument laisse pantois. D'autant qu'il lui arrive de faire remonter le Celte à l'Age du Bronze Moyen. De même, si les langues Celtiques provienne du Bronze Atlantique, quid des influences des langues non IE parlées sur la façade Atlantique, comme l'Aquitain, l'Ibère ou le Tartessien (attestés durant l'Age du Fer, mais qui devaient être présents déjà à l'Age du Bronze)? La question est centrale dans son raisonnement, car son argument central est l'absence d'influence par l'absence d'emprunts dans le proto-Celte, mais il l'évacue par des pirouettes (que les Aquitains puissent être voisins des peuples de la culture du Bronze Atlantique, et non partie de cette culture, ne répond pas au problème des contacts linguistiques), quitte à réprendre la théorie assez peu crédible du Tartessien = Celte. Idem, mais là il n'est pas seul, la densité en toponymes celtes, et notamment hydronymes, semble particulèrement dense au coeur du Hallstatt de l'Ouest, où se trouve d'ailleurs La Tène, mais même si cela pose problème vis-à-vis d'une origine plus à l'Ouest, il n'en tient pas compte.

    Pour moi, ça fait beaucoup. Outre quelques problèmes non négligeables sur la manière dont il appréhende les contacts linguistiques: il n'évoque que les emprunts, rien d'autre, et il est oublieux de l'absence de proximité géographique avec les cultures grecques et étrusques. Accessoirement, il mélange allégrement Celte et proto-Celte.

    Là, j'avoue que ça ne donne plus envie de discuter, car il y a trop d'incohérences.
    Last edited by ffoucart; 07-02-2020 at 08:48 AM.

  5. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ffoucart For This Useful Post:

     fabrice E (07-02-2020),  JMcB (07-02-2020),  jstephan (07-02-2020),  Ruderico (07-02-2020)

  6. #2404
    Global Moderator
    Posts
    3,016
    Sex
    Location
    Beira Douro
    Ethnicity
    Portuguese highlander
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y31991>FT17866
    mtDNA (M)
    H20 (xH20a)

    Asturias Portugal 1143 Portugal 1485 Portugal Order of Christ
    Quote Originally Posted by ffoucart View Post
    Je suis navré, mais l'impression que j'ai, peut-être car il s'agit d'un thème récurrent, c'est qu'Alan et quelques autres restent plus ou moins liés à l'idée que les Celtes sont originaires de l'Ouest (lire les Iles Britanniques), notamment du fait du peu de changement génétique notamment en Irlande. Ce qui d'un point de vue culturel (donc linguistique), n'a pas beaucoup de sens.

    Alan a été beaucoup plus véhément dans d'autres fils, mais il n'en reste pas moins qu'il y a un problème de bonne foi. Il se laisse dominer par ses intuitions ou ses désirs, car il y a un vrai problème de cohérence. Quelques exemples: dans un post, il dit qu'au moins Hallstatt D a des éléments celtiques, donc c'était probablement des Celtes, dans d'autres, il le nie farouchement. Dans certains posts, les langues Celtiques ont émergées pendant l'Age du Bronze, mais dans d'autres, il évoque les liens commerciaux des princes d'Hallstatt D (Age du Fer) pour indiquer que le proto-Celte n'ayant pas eu d'influence d'autre groupes linguistiques, le proto-Celte ne pouvait pas être leur langue. Comme le proto-Celte était alors éteint depuis un bon moment, l'argument laisse pantois. D'autant qu'il lui arrive de faire remonter le Celte à l'Age du Bronze Moyen. De même, si les langues Celtiques provienne du Bronze Atlantique, quid des influences des langues non IE parlées sur la façade Atlantique, comme l'Aquitain, l'Ibère ou le Tartessien (attestés durant l'Age du Fer, mais qui devaient être présents déjà à l'Age du Bronze)? La question est centrale dans son raisonnement, car son argument central est l'absence d'influence par l'absence d'emprunts dans le proto-Celte, mais il l'évacue par des pirouettes (que les Aquitains puissent être voisins des peuples de la culture du Bronze Atlantique, et non partie de cette culture, ne répond pas au problème des contacts linguistiques), quitte à réprendre la théorie assez peu crédible du Tartessien = Celte. Idem, mais là il n'est pas seul, la densité en toponymes celtes, et notamment hydronymes, semble particulèrement dense au coeur du Hallstatt de l'Ouest, où se trouve d'ailleurs La Tène, mais même si cela pose problème vis-à-vis d'une origine plus à l'Ouest, il n'en tient pas compte.

    Pour moi, ça fait beaucoup. Outre quelques problèmes non négligeables sur la manière dont il appréhende les contacts linguistiques: il n'évoque que les emprunts, rien d'autre, et il est oublieux de l'absence de proximité géographique avec les cultures grecques et étrusques. Accessoirement, il mélange allégrement Celte et proto-Celte.

    Là, j'avoue que ça ne donne plus envie de discuter, car il y a trop d'incohérences.
    I'd like to chime in, if you don't mind. I apologise for typing in English again, but I'd rather not butcher your language. As usual feel free to reply in French if you want to comment.

    While I do enjoy reading through alan's posts, since he is clearly much more familiarised with the archaeological findings and sites than most of us are, my opinion is also slightly different from his - I believe I read angles' own hypothesis in one of those threads and I agree with it, ie a LBA (maybe MBA) with origins in somewhere in the Franco-German (maybe Swiss) region. Anyway, opinions aside, I agree that it ends up being very difficult to discuss with that thread, and that alan ends up being a bit dismissive of theories (even if solidly grounded) that go against his own model, while occasionally supporting fringe theories that favour his. And this is where I'd like to share a bit, particularly when it comes to Iberia, since that's what I'm clearly more familiar with, and what usually motivates me the most.


    The inscriptions in Tartessian are all from the Iron Age, although dated from what we refer to as the 'first Iron Age' in Portugal, but not from the Bronze age. The first Iron Age was characterised by the introduction of iron tools following contacts with Eastern Mediterranean cultures - also named the Orientalising Period - particularly Phoenicians. I believe these inscriptions cease to exist following the collapse of Tartessos, after the siege of Tyre, probably because Tartessos' power heavily relied on its trade with this Phoenician city and its satellites. It is also around this period that the 'second Iron Age' begins with the arrival of peoples strongly associated with Celtic-speakers, probably Celtiberians from modern north/northeastern Spain, in southwest Iberia. One thing that isn't irrelevant is that Tartessian was written using the 'southwestern script', which seems strongly related to the 'southeastern script' (very creative names there) which was itself an introduction from the eastern Mediterranean and used by Iberian-speaking peoples. It would also seem rather odd that a Celtic culture (Tartessian) were replaced with yet another one (Celtiberians/Celtici) despite being in an area that had little contact with Western Europe where Hallstatt C/D cultures existed.

    The Celtic Atlantic Bronze thing doesn't seem very solid either, west Iberia was part of this system but not as closely as Brittany, and this influence didn't last for many centuries. It was also more significant in the NW than the SW - so how come the area with more contacts (NW) with this supposed Celtic Atlantic spoke Lusitanian, and the area with less contact (SW) spoke a more proper variation of Celtic (Tartessian, if we assume Tartessian was Celtic)? IA SW Iberia also sees the presence of the Celtici, whereas to the NW was territory of Lusitanian-related groups. Gallaecians seem like Lusitanians speaking a Celtic language - in fact one of the most prominent archaeologists in Portugal even labels northern Lusitanian groups as Gallaeci - and this influence seems very late because of archaeologically similarities between both groups, and the presence of related theonyms/anthroponyms/hydronyms/toponyms which would be hard to explain if this Celtic influence had been in place for many centuries in part of these NW groups (Celtic-speaking/Gallaeci) but not in others (non-Celtic-speaking/Lusitani).
    It's much more parsimonious that Celtic influence reached west Iberia somewhen by the turn of the 'first' and 'second' Iron Ages (maybe smaller/earlier groups still during the first) coming from Celtiberia, settling in the SW on top of old Tartessian territories. Since these groups were influential their culture and language became prestigious, infiltrating non-Celtic-speaking groups like the Lusitani in the NW. Finally you'd have movements of Celtic-speaking peoples into the NW, particularly along the coastline and well into the time of Roman presence in Iberia, as some inscriptions in Galicia/N_Portugal seem to include Celtiberian names previously unrecorded locally, and are dated from around the time of the siege of Numantia, give or take a few decades - probably the consequence of migrants/refugees fleeing war with Rome.


    Finally I'd like to post a few quotes from Carlos Quiles' blog, which some people in this forum "love", but read anyway if you're interested in the question of IE/Celtic languages in Iberia - which you should, even if only to counter the idea it was present here since the Middle Bronze Age or thereabouts.

    This isn't really from his blog alone, it's from Hacia una definición del lusitano (Vallejo, 2013) which contains a sort of collection of Lusitanian-related linguistic findings and their interpretation.
    https://indo-european.eu/2019/07/eur...old-europeans/
    Firstly, it is striking that this geographical profile drawn by the texts correspond almost exactly to the distribution of large series of anthroponyms and theonyms.* Among the abundant names of people we can highlight those with a large number of repetitions whose appearance is circumscribed to our region of study (see Fig. 2). Some of them are truly frequent and lack parallels on the outside, such as the stem Tanc / Tang- (of Tanginus) with no less than 130 attestations, or Tonc- / Tong- (of Tongius or Tongetamus) with 70. Others show also sufficiently representative figures as Camalus and Maelo (with 46 repetitions each), Celtius (with 29), Caturo or Sunua (with 23), Camira (with 22), Doquirus (with 20), Louesius (with 18), Al(l)ucquius (with 17) or Malge(i)nus (with 16). According to these quantities, it appears that these are not casual occurrences of names, taking into account that chance tends to be reduced to a minimum in the study of the Iberian Peninsula, since we can easily handle the entire peninsular corpus. In turn, Reue, Bandue, Nauiae and Crougiae are the theonyms that best represent the Lusitanian-Galician area, coinciding fundamentally (Figure 3) with the picture that anthroponymy and texts had drawn, although with less examples.


    Top left: Lusitanian (long and short) inscriptions; top right: Map of the distribution of statue-menhirs and south-western stelae, by Rodríguez-Corral (2014) [(1) stelae in Beira Alta and Tras-os-Montes (Portugal), and Orense (Galicia, Spain); (2) both in the same territory: northwestern statue-menhirs and southwestern stelae; (3) hybridization of both into the same material form (stela/stela-menhir from Pedra Alta)]; bottom left: Lusitanian teonymy; bottom right: Lusitanian anthroponymy.
    Related to this, you have Vallejo's take on the neighbouring Asturi
    (…) First of all, it seems that there is an independent onomastic area, which can be defined by a series of names and suffixes that are repeated there exclusively or predominantly. This area does not seem to correspond with what we know of the Lusitanian-Galician onomastics nor of the more coastal Asturian; it also differs from the Celtiberian area, with which it does not have features in common. In this way, and always in the conjectural terrain, we could find ourselves before an Indo-European non-Celtic language different from the Lusitanian language.
    And lastly we have Patrick Sims-Williams Camb. Archaeol. J (2020)
    https://indo-european.eu/2020/04/eur...t-or-the-east/
    Moreover, the Celticity of the Iberian peninsula is exaggerated on all these maps. Nearly half of the relevant peninsular names contain Celtic versions of the Proto-Indo-European root *bʰr̥gʰ- ‘high’ which in Celtic developed the distinctive form *brig-, whence the Celtic words *brig-s and *briga, which gave Old Irish brí and Welsh bre respectively. These Insular Celtic words mean simply ‘hill’, but on the Continent the meaning seems to be ‘hillfort’ or ‘oppidum’ and in northwest Hispania briga is often translated as castellum in Latin sources (Luján 2011; Sims-Williams 2006, 49–53, 307, 328; Untermann 2018, 136). (…) Out of my 153 locations in Hispania with ‘Celtic-looking’ names (Sims-Williams 2006, 142–51), 62 (41 per cent) included BRIG (or its variants BRIC, BIRIK, BRIS, BRIA), the next most popular string being SEG (or SEK) ‘power, victory’, in 17 locations (12 per cent).

    Thus the Celtic-looking toponymy of Hispania is heavily weighted towards BRIG and is much less varied than that of areas such as France and Britain. This monotonous lack of variety suggests that it lacks chronological depth. Moreover, alongside true Celtic compounds like Sego-briga ‘power-hillfort’ (in Celtiberia) we find many hybrids with non-Celtic or even Latin first elements, e.g. Conim-briga (now Coimbra, Portugal) and Flavio-briga (Castro Urdiales, Spain), the name of the latter colonia having replaced Amanum portus according to Pliny (Natural History 4.20.110). Such hybrids may sometimes indicate no more than an awareness of the prestige of Celtic culture in the way that modern English-medium creations like Bourn-ville and Minnea-polis reflect the prestige of French and Greek. It is well known that foreign place-name elements can be borrowed in bilingual communities and then spread into non-bilingual areas, a case in point in Welsh toponymy being cnwc ‘hill’, from Irish cnoc (Wmffre 2007, 54-6).

    Another example is *burg- from the Proto-Indo-European root *bʰr̥gʰ-. This was borrowed by the Romans from Germanic (or from a language such as ‘East Alpine Indo-European’) as burgus ‘watchtower, citadel’, a word that then turned up in Latin place-names as far afield as north Africa (Sims-Williams 2006, 4, 317–18). In the same way Celtic briga may have been current as a term for various types of hillforts and oppida in Iberia well outside the Celtic-speaking regions (cf. Gorrochategui & Vallejo 2019, 340 n. 11; Luján 2019, 327–81; Sims- Williams 2012b, 44). And in areas where Celtic names are otherwise rare, briga/castellum may indicate relatively recent Celtic intrusions (Luján 2011). Given the chronology of hillforts in the peninsula (Arenas-Esteban 2012, 36; Fernández-Götz 2018, 146-7; Lorrio & Ruiz Zapatero 2005, 222), it is hard to imagine that many of the peninsular -briga names are much older than the first millennium BC.

    When you add all of this together it seems very unlikely that Celtic languages were autochthonous rather than intrusive, and both Gallaecian and Celtiberian languages seem closely related (and both Q-Celtic), and distinct from other types of Celtic languages, probably because they remained in relative isolation after arriving to Iberia which would perhaps be compatible with a Hallstatt origin, as La Tène had little relevance in Iberia, and its contacts were mostly with the non-IE-speaking Iberians.
    Tartessian is irrelevant, as its Celticity seems only supported by Koch, and is widely criticised. My guess is that it's probably some autochthonous non-IE language.
    Lusitanian is probably just one of the different palaeo-hispanic IE languages that existed by the time Celts and later Romans arrived, whether it was from the Atlantic Bronze, or BB I have no idea, however we do know BBs had a very large genetic impact in Iberia, but we have no idea if the Atlantic Bronze had too or not. Given it was maritime-based, I'm currently a bit sceptical, but you never know.

    I quite like Carlos' IA map, for the time being I'd subscribe to it
    Last edited by Ruderico; 07-02-2020 at 01:31 PM.
    YDNA - E-Y31991>PF4428>Y134097>Y134104>Y168273>FT17866 Domingos Rodrigues, b. circa 1690 Hidden Content , Viana do Castelo, Portugal - Stonemason, miller.
    mtDNA - H20. Monica Vieira, b. circa 1700 Hidden Content , Porto, Portugal

    Hidden Content
    Global25 PCA West Eurasia dataset Hidden Content

    [1] "distance%=1.3492"

    Ruderico

    Celt+Iberia,85
    North_African,10.2
    Rome_Imperial,4.8

  7. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Ruderico For This Useful Post:

     Andour (07-02-2020),  anglesqueville (07-02-2020),  ffoucart (07-02-2020),  JJJ (07-02-2020),  JMcB (07-02-2020),  JonikW (07-02-2020),  jstephan (07-02-2020),  moesan (07-07-2020),  The_Lyonnist (Today),  Trelvern (07-03-2020),  Webb (07-02-2020)

Page 241 of 241 FirstFirst ... 141191231239240241

Similar Threads

  1. Le Grenier des Néolithiques Européens
    By ffoucart in forum French
    Replies: 223
    Last Post: 06-19-2020, 12:03 PM
  2. Indo European(ization)
    By Barellalee in forum I
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 10-22-2015, 07:00 PM
  3. Indo-Iranian Archaeology
    By DMXX in forum Archaeology (Prehistory)
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 04-23-2015, 12:58 AM
  4. Are Anatolians Indo European?
    By Anatolian Fighter in forum General Sociology/Ethnology
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-18-2014, 10:18 PM

Posting Permissions

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