Page 3 of 22 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 217

Thread: Haplogroup J2 and the indo-european languages

  1. #21
    Registered Users
    Posts
    888
    Sex
    Location
    Canada
    Ethnicity
    Italian
    Y-DNA
    J-Y15222
    mtDNA
    U5a2b5

    Italy Italy Sicily Italy Two Sicilies Vatican Star of David
    Quote Originally Posted by ernekar View Post
    We dont know if the minoans spoke IE or not. As far as i know their scripts are undeciphered.
    So we dont know what language it is.

    And the IE group which came with J2a didnt need any steppe dna. As i said, in my theory there are many groups(tribes) interacting in the steppe(and caucasus). Not all of them need nessecarrily to have intermixed with ALL of the other groups. But they could still wage war, trade and learn from each other. So some groups which had mixed with r1's would have gotten steppe dna, while the ones that didnt have direct contact with r1's could still speak IE, but didnt have steppe genes, as they had not interbred.
    Well its almost certain Minoans didn’t speak an Indo-European language, there is a Minoan healing ritual written in an Egyptian tomb, and the language sounds much closer to Hurrian or Hattic, there is nothing that would suggest its I.E. also I.E. language speakers (Mycenaeans) only entered Mainland Greece during the Late Bronze Age, even to this day the Greek language contains elements of an extinct non Indo European language.

    Your entitled to your opinion, so I wish you luck.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Principe For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (02-09-2018),  Awale (02-09-2018),  Power77 (02-11-2018),  Pribislav (02-09-2018)

  3. #22
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    621
    Sex
    Location
    Gulf of Fars
    Ethnicity
    Somali
    Y-DNA
    E-V32
    mtDNA
    N1a

    Somalia Ethiopia Eritrea Djibouti
    Quote Originally Posted by ernekar View Post
    We dont know if the minoans spoke IE or not. As far as i know their scripts are undeciphered.
    So we dont know what language it is.
    Agamemnon, our resident linguist, could explain things a lot better, and in more detail, than I can but we can basically tell from their writing script... Just from looking at Linear-B which was used for Mycenaean-Greek, we can tell it and its predecessor were not made for a Hellenic language, let alone Mycenaean-Greek. So what Indo-European language subgroup was around before Hellenic and why did the speakers of this group leave no steppe ancestry behind in Minoans when the Hellenic speakers certainly didn't fail to leave some behind in the Mycenaeans?

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

     Agamemnon (02-09-2018),  bmoney (02-11-2018),  Power77 (02-11-2018),  Pribislav (02-09-2018),  Principe (02-09-2018)

  5. #23
    Registered Users
    Posts
    280
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Awale View Post
    Agamemnon, our resident linguist, could explain things a lot better, and in more detail, than I can but we can basically tell from their writing script... Just from looking at Linear-B which was used for Mycenaean-Greek, we can tell it and its predecessor were not made for a Hellenic language, let alone Mycenaean-Greek. So what Indo-European language subgroup was around before Hellenic and why did the speakers of this group leave no steppe ancestry behind in Minoans when the Hellenic speakers certainly didn't fail to leave some behind in the Mycenaeans?
    Because the steppe admixture is not a nessesity just to be IE speaking. It is just a necessity that a group was a part the early IE sprachbund to get a language which resembles its neighbours' languages. It doesnt mean that all the tribes within the sprachbund interbred with ALL the other tribes in the sprachbund. That means that the "minoans" maybe didnt get to interbreed directly with the ANE bearing R1a's or R1b's tribes, but still got to understand the common language of all the different tribes which had interacted with each other over long time.

    I dont know about the minoans being non-IE.
    But if someone could explain the arguments for me as to why they are not IE, i am of course willing to admit i am wrong.
    After all, some good studies or arguments on the minoan language could have passed me by unnoticed.

  6. #24
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    621
    Sex
    Location
    Gulf of Fars
    Ethnicity
    Somali
    Y-DNA
    E-V32
    mtDNA
    N1a

    Somalia Ethiopia Eritrea Djibouti
    Quote Originally Posted by ernekar View Post
    Because the steppe admixture is not a nessesity just to be IE speaking. It is just a necessity that a group was a part the early IE sprachbund to get a language which resembles its neighbours' languages. It doesnt mean that all the tribes within the sprachbund interbred with ALL the other tribes in the sprachbund. That means that the "minoans" maybe didnt get to interbreed directly with the ANE bearing R1a's or R1b's tribes, but still got to understand the common language of all the different tribes which had interacted with each other over long time.

    I dont know about the minoans being non-IE.
    But if someone could explain the arguments for me as to why they are not IE, i am of course willing to admit i am wrong.
    After all, some good studies or arguments on the minoan language could have passed me by unnoticed.
    Hmm, well languages weren't historically passed on so easily in my experience from reading over the years. Usually, unless something like elite-dominance, a full-scale migration and subsequent intermixture or significant economic and/or political dominance didn't occur; there'd not be much reason for people to do something as drastic as abandon their prior language for a new one on a wide-scale (as in, more than just the elites doing so). Is there any proof of anything like that happening with the Minoans or, more precisely, their predecessors from a culture we know looked Indo-European speaking?

    But I've invited Agamemnon to join us. He knows all of this far better than I do and I'm interested to see his points myself.

  7. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Awale For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (02-09-2018),  bmoney (02-11-2018),  Power77 (02-11-2018),  Principe (02-09-2018)

  8. #25
    Registered Users
    Posts
    280
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Principe View Post
    Well its almost certain Minoans didn’t speak an Indo-European language, there is a Minoan healing ritual written in an Egyptian tomb, and the language sounds much closer to Hurrian or Hattic, there is nothing that would suggest its I.E. also I.E. language speakers (Mycenaeans) only entered Mainland Greece during the Late Bronze Age, even to this day the Greek language contains elements of an extinct non Indo European language.

    Your entitled to your opinion, so I wish you luck.
    It is not my opinion. It is just one theory. I have many theories as to what happened. I dont claim it is more correct or uncorrect than any of the other theories that are here.
    But i think it is a good thing when people come with different theories. It leads the way to refinement of arguments on both sides.

    And there is not really much else to do than theorize. Except to wait for ancient DNa of course. And after that theorize again from the beginning.

    As far as i know your theory could be just as right or wrong as mine.
    And if i know ancent dna well, we both will be wrong when it comes out

  9. #26
    J Man
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Pribislav View Post
    I think it's safe to include I2a2a-M223>L701>L699 in that group:

    I1738 5473-5326 BC Vovnigi Ukraine_Neolithic I2a2a1b1b M223>CTS616>CTS10057>L701>L699

    I3715 5500-4800 BC Volniensky Ukraine_Neolithic I2a2a1b1 M223>CTS616>CTS10057>L701

    I3717 5500-4800 BC Dereivka Ukraine_Neolithic I2a2a1b1 M223>CTS616>CTS10057>L701

    I2175 3328-3015 BC Smyadovo Bulgaria_EBA I2a2a1b1 M223>CTS616>CTS10057>L701

    I2165 3020-2895 BC Merichleri Bulgaria_EBA I2a2a1b1b M223>CTS616>CTS10057>L701>L699

    Bul4 3012-2900 BC Mednikarovo Yamnaya_Bulgaria I2a2a1b1b M223>CTS616>CTS10057>L701>L699

    RISE552 2849-2143 BC Ulan Yamnaya_Kalmykia I2a2a1b1b2 M223>CTS616>CTS10057>L701>L699>Y5669
    Good catch and yes that is correct I think...I thought that after my post as well actually but I am currently at work and I did not have time to update my post earlier haha.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to J Man For This Useful Post:

     Principe (02-10-2018)

  11. #27
    Registered Users
    Posts
    280
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Awale View Post
    Hmm, well languages weren't historically passed on so easily in my experience from reading over the years. Usually, unless something like elite-dominance, a full-scale migration and subsequent intermixture or significant economic and/or political dominance didn't occur; there'd not be much reason for people to do something as drastic as abandon their prior language for a new one on a wide-scale (as in, more than just the elites doing so). Is there any proof of anything like that happening with the Minoans or, more precisely, their predecessors from a culture we know looked Indo-European speaking?

    But I've invited Agamemnon to join us. He knows all of this far better than I do and I'm interested to see his points myself.
    The point is that the minoans didnt have to adapt the language from anyone. At first when j2's and r1's met for the first time somewhere near the northern caucasus and the steppe. The j'2 tribes would probably already have been several dialects or languages. But in essence they would understand eachother. The r1's maybe also had some languages that were kind of alike and would understand each other. Then in the contact zones between the r1's and j2's there would be trading, copying of inventions, wars, daughters given for alliances and the such. Some of the tribes would borrow words, technology etc. from other tribes, and in time most of the tribes would be able to understand most of its neighbours' languages. the tribes could also interbreed sometimes, but that does not mean that all tribes mixed with all other tribes. So a tribe or two could easily be within the sprachbund without getting ANE.
    I think the only difference in what i am saying and what others are saying, is that early IE was a mix of some sort of caucasus languages, and some steppe languages. So some of the caucassus groups could easily have had a language that contributed to early IE without taking any of the ANE part of the words, and likewise there could have been some R1a or r1b's more north of the steppe which didnt get any of the caucasus words.

  12. #28
    J Man
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by ernekar View Post
    But it an oldfashioned way of thinking that everything is caused by assimilation or migrations. Prehistoric groups should not be considered in isolation. They almost always interact and borrow technology, words, instritutions from each other.
    There is no reason to think that the R1a and R1b kept their language unchanged upon getting 50% genes from the CHG, while the langauge of the caucasus people didnt have any impact at all at the genesis of the early form of IE.
    The thing is though that most academics now seem to think that the Yamnaya people and their close relatives were the original Indo-European speakers. You would expect Y-DNA haplogroup J2 to show up among them if it was part of the earliest Indo-European speaking groups but so far it has not and there have been quite a few Yamnaya samples tested. They are all R1 and some I2a2.

  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to J Man For This Useful Post:

     bmoney (02-11-2018),  Power77 (02-11-2018),  Principe (02-10-2018)

  14. #29
    Registered Users
    Posts
    280
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by J Man View Post
    The thing is though that most academics now seem to think that the Yamnaya people and their close relatives were the original Indo-European speakers. You would expect Y-DNA haplogroup J2 to show up among them if it was part of the earliest Indo-European speaking groups but so far it has not and there have been quite a few Yamnaya samples tested. They are all R1 and some I2a2.
    The thing is that i dont go with most academics. Most academics often seem to follow the latest paradigm. There is absolutely no evidence that yamnaya spoke IE. I am not saying that i think they didnt. But i dont think they were the first. IE was a mix beween the langauges of some caucasus people, and steppe people. None of them spoke if first.

    Please, come with some other argruments than "Everyone thinks one thing, so you are wrong if you dont think the same"
    Last edited by ernekar; 02-10-2018 at 11:14 AM.

  15. #30
    Registered Users
    Posts
    280
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by J Man View Post
    The thing is though that most academics now seem to think that the Yamnaya people and their close relatives were the original Indo-European speakers. You would expect Y-DNA haplogroup J2 to show up among them if it was part of the earliest Indo-European speaking groups but so far it has not and there have been quite a few Yamnaya samples tested. They are all R1 and some I2a2.
    And remember, we dont even know if yamnaya was one tribe or several. As far as i know Yamnaya is just a modern contruct made up to describe a complex of similar material cultures.
    No one knows if they even spoke the same language, or what languages they spoke.
    Everything is just specualation.

    So my theory is just as plausible as everyones else' simplistic "IE languages started with only one haplogroup, all others are just assimilated"-theory.
    Imo, mine is even more realistic.

    Please show me the evidence that yamnaya were the first IE speakers. I study archeology, and people at my school still discuss where IE came from. For example my teacher who is an expert on anthropological and archeological theory still thinks agriculture brought IE. NOTHING iS SETTLED regarding the Indo europeans. I know a lot of studies on these matters, and i am pretty sure there doesnt exist any evidence that yamnaya spoke IE
    In the real world people still discuss. Its only on these forums that people get thrown eggs at them if they say that the yamnayans were not the first IE speakers
    Last edited by ernekar; 02-10-2018 at 11:20 AM.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ernekar For This Useful Post:

     Kanenas (02-10-2018),  SpinosaurusN3H1 (02-10-2018)

Page 3 of 22 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-24-2018, 09:47 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-23-2017, 03:21 PM
  3. Replies: 253
    Last Post: 03-30-2016, 07:10 AM
  4. New paper on the origins of Indo-European Languages
    By Marmaduke in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 11-21-2013, 05:14 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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