Page 65 of 97 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775 ... LastLast
Results 641 to 650 of 962

Thread: Uralic homeland and genetics and their implications for PIE

  1. #641
    Registered Users
    Posts
    169
    Sex

    We have two samples which may be West Chudic but they are not representatives of the same population. It is even possible they are not even Uralic speakers.

    Target: RUS_Ingria_IA:VIII5_2
    Distance: 3.2228% / 0.03222813
    98.0 Baltic_LVA_BA
    2.0 RUS_Krasnoyarsk_BA

    Target: RUS_Ingria_IA:VIII9_1
    Distance: 2.9322% / 0.02932236
    55.8 Baltic_LVA_BA
    22.2 DNK_BA
    16.4 CZE_Early_Slav
    3.2 RUS_Sintashta_MLBA
    2.4 RUS_Krasnoyarsk_BA

    If the Generalissimo is still around it would be appreciated if he was to add VII15 to G25 for further insight into the region. I believe Vladimir will take as a challenge to make the DNK_BA go away

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

     parastais (02-25-2021)

  3. #642
    Registered Users
    Posts
    862
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    N - Z16980

    Quote Originally Posted by Standardized Ape View Post
    We have two samples which may be West Chudic but they are not representatives of the same population. It is even possible they are not even Uralic speakers.

    Target: RUS_Ingria_IA:VIII5_2
    Distance: 3.2228% / 0.03222813
    98.0 Baltic_LVA_BA
    2.0 RUS_Krasnoyarsk_BA
    Not sure how to properly read these. Other than - all those components besides Krasnoyarsk correlate to each other, and therefore for each individual case some individual mix appear..

    Btw, if you use same antique populations -> how would modern Finns, Estonians, Latvian, Lithuanians, Belorussians and Swedes look like? Would they pick up Krasnoyarsk or not?

  4. #643
    Registered Users
    Posts
    169
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by parastais View Post
    Not sure how to properly read these. Other than - all those components besides Krasnoyarsk correlate to each other, and therefore for each individual case some individual mix appear..

    Btw, if you use same antique populations -> how would modern Finns, Estonians, Latvian, Lithuanians, Belorussians and Swedes look like? Would they pick up Krasnoyarsk or not?
    Swedes and Balts don't really pick up Krasnoyarsk_BA but this method isn't surgically precise to the smallest level. East Slavs(including to a small degree even Belarusians) do pick up some Krasnoyarsk_BA. SRB_Mokrin_EBA seems to improve the fits a lot.

    Target: Belarusian
    Distance: 1.6976% / 0.01697587
    49.2 Baltic_LVA_BA
    22.6 CZE_Early_Slav
    21.0 SRB_Mokrin_EBA
    3.2 DEU_MA_Alemanic_Lombardian
    3.0 RUS_Sintashta_MLBA
    1.0 RUS_Krasnoyarsk_BA

    Target: Estonian
    Distance: 1.6422% / 0.01642219
    59.6 Baltic_LVA_BA
    15.2 DEU_MA_Alemanic_Lombardian
    9.2 RUS_Petrovka_MLBA
    7.4 CZE_Early_Slav
    6.4 SRB_Mokrin_EBA
    2.2 RUS_Krasnoyarsk_BA

    Target: Lithuanian
    Distance: 1.7124% / 0.01712411
    67.6 Baltic_LVA_BA
    17.4 SRB_Mokrin_EBA
    11.6 DEU_MA_Alemanic_Lombardian
    3.4 CZE_Early_Slav

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Standardized Ape For This Useful Post:

     parastais (02-25-2021)

  6. #644
    Registered Users
    Posts
    273
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by parastais View Post
    Actually there was one work on possible Uralic placenames in Belarus (I know because I was looking for it few years ago, I think once Lang first time wrote on Southern Route, I kinda liked his idea and did my google research), but that I think was in Russian and not in a format of text, but photo copy of printed old article. Later I googled and found out that his ideas were critiqued and dropped. But I can't remember who was it.
    OK, interesting. Methods have developed all the time, so totally new scrutiny should be done.

    Quote Originally Posted by parastais
    Until that is done. To me an argument that waves wiped out Finnic placenames on Southern Route, is similar to argument that waves wiped out Finnic placenames on Northern Route. I really dont understand who those two arguments are different?
    The difference is, that in the northern route there are other Uralic languages, so there is lesser room for Finnic. In the southern route there are no other Uralic languages, so there is more room for Finnic.

    This is because the West-Uralic expansions seem to be contemporaneous, or Saamic even earlier than Finnic (according to Lang, although no linguistic evidence requires that), and Meryanic has some similar-looking sound changes than Saamic.

    Of course it would still be theoretically possible that Finnic spread to the west first and Meryanic only followed it. Still, the evidence support more the southern route for Finnic than the northern route (although not conclusively).

    Quote Originally Posted by parastais
    Besides I am somewhat puzzled by West Chudes, if it was decided based on toponyms that those guys were some kind of combo of Finnic and Meryan, then what makes us reject scenario -
    1) proto-Finnic language presence (i.e. in toponyms)
    2) Meryan immigrants changing Finnic toponyms to their language
    3) Slavic immigrants changing Meryanized Finnic toponyms to their language
    I don't follow - why combo of Finnic and Meryan? West Chude is an archaic language form, which still survived until the slavicization of the area.

    Quote Originally Posted by parastais
    It is already a titanic work to tell behind Slavic name for the river whether it was Baltic or Finnic at route. Trying to tell whether it was originally proto-Finnic later interpreted by incoming Meryan becomes close to impossible, and might turn a researcher towards idea that West Chudes were some sort of Finnic-Meryan mish mash.
    If Meryans adopted Proto-Finnic placenames, the Finnic sound changes would still be visible.

    Quote Originally Posted by parastais
    According to Supren and Yarotau, in Polotsk region 55% of hydronyms are Finno-Ugric, 27% are Baltic, 17% Slavic. Guess you must find a student to classify them. If they are proto-Balto-Finnic (and not say South Finnic or Meryan, etc), then that would be a huge argument for Southern Route.
    Good point.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Jaska For This Useful Post:

     parastais (02-25-2021)

  8. #645
    Registered Users
    Posts
    862
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    N - Z16980

    @Jaska,
    А. Е. Яротов, Топонимика Беларуси, 2011.
    He wrote that NW Belarus had few layers of toponyms:
    1) Oldest Baltic Finns
    2) Hybrid Finnic & Baltic
    3) Baltic
    4) Slavic

    Any linguist in Finland working on this subject? They should evaluate this and at least try to assess features of donor language for that oldest layer. Maybe that is indeed how Baltic Finnics arrived into Baltics, would be huge news.

  9. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to parastais For This Useful Post:

     anglesqueville (02-25-2021),  Huck Finn (02-25-2021),  Jaska (02-25-2021),  Ryukendo (02-25-2021)

  10. #646
    Registered Users
    Posts
    862
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    N - Z16980

    Quote Originally Posted by Standardized Ape View Post
    Swedes and Balts don't really pick up Krasnoyarsk_BA but this method isn't surgically precise to the smallest level. East Slavs(including to a small degree even Belarusians) do pick up some Krasnoyarsk_BA. SRB_Mokrin_EBA seems to improve the fits a lot.

    Target: Belarusian
    Distance: 1.6976% / 0.01697587
    49.2 Baltic_LVA_BA
    22.6 CZE_Early_Slav
    21.0 SRB_Mokrin_EBA
    3.2 DEU_MA_Alemanic_Lombardian
    3.0 RUS_Sintashta_MLBA
    1.0 RUS_Krasnoyarsk_BA

    Target: Estonian
    Distance: 1.6422% / 0.01642219
    59.6 Baltic_LVA_BA
    15.2 DEU_MA_Alemanic_Lombardian
    9.2 RUS_Petrovka_MLBA
    7.4 CZE_Early_Slav
    6.4 SRB_Mokrin_EBA
    2.2 RUS_Krasnoyarsk_BA

    Target: Lithuanian
    Distance: 1.7124% / 0.01712411
    67.6 Baltic_LVA_BA
    17.4 SRB_Mokrin_EBA
    11.6 DEU_MA_Alemanic_Lombardian
    3.4 CZE_Early_Slav
    When I did those, Hun_Avar_Szolad was all Lithuanians needed apart from Baltic_LVA_BA. Which keeps puzzling me greatly.

  11. #647
    Registered Users
    Posts
    862
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    N - Z16980

    @Jaska,
    Do you know what Petri Kallio thinks of Southern Route?
    This is quote from his work on “Gauja/Koivu”:
    “ thus supporting the theory that the earliest Finnic expansion to northern Latvia dates no earlier than the second century AD. Before this Finnic southward expansion, the Baltic speaking area extended much further to the north, as evidenced by the words borrowed into Middle Proto-Finnic from North Baltic, that is, my proposed label for this otherwise unattested Baltic dialect (Kallio 2008).”
    Does he still hold on view that it was Southward expansion (rather than Northward) or had changed that in light of new data or Valter Lang’s theory?

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

     Ryukendo (02-28-2021)

  13. #648
    Registered Users
    Posts
    862
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    N - Z16980

    Also from Petri Kallio:
    Diversification of Proto-Finnic
    “ As a matter of fact, the Finnic speech area was probably even more restricted to the coastal areas than his map suggests, because As a matter of fact, the Finnic speech area was probably even more restricted to the coastal areas than his map suggests, because it was not until the second century AD that typical tarand graves spread from coastal Estonia to inland Estonia as well as northern Latvia (Lang 2007: 191–203), thus causing the separation of Inland Finnic (> South Estonian) and Gulf of Riga Finnic (> Livonian)”
    If this is how it, then Southern Route becomes rather doubtful hypothesis, despite its attractiveness..

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to parastais For This Useful Post:

     Ryukendo (02-28-2021)

  15. #649
    Registered Users
    Posts
    273
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by parastais View Post
    Also from Petri Kallio:
    Diversification of Proto-Finnic
    “ As a matter of fact, the Finnic speech area was probably even more restricted to the coastal areas than his map suggests, because As a matter of fact, the Finnic speech area was probably even more restricted to the coastal areas than his map suggests, because it was not until the second century AD that typical tarand graves spread from coastal Estonia to inland Estonia as well as northern Latvia (Lang 2007: 191–203), thus causing the separation of Inland Finnic (> South Estonian) and Gulf of Riga Finnic (> Livonian)”
    If this is how it, then Southern Route becomes rather doubtful hypothesis, despite its attractiveness..
    However, the maps in Lang 2020 show, that even the earliest tarand graves were found in Curland and Gauja region in Latvia. In 2007 Lang hadn't formulated his synthesis yet, and the data was more sparse.

    It's better that we still handle archaeological and linguistic phenomena separately, because cultural phenomena may have several roots. That tarand graves could in some point be connected to the Finnic speakers, does not mean that they can in all the earlier points in time be connected to the Finnic speakers, because archaeological or genetic continuity cannot testify for linguistic continuity.

  16. #650
    Registered Users
    Posts
    273
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by parastais View Post
    @Jaska,
    Do you know what Petri Kallio thinks of Southern Route?
    This is quote from his work on “Gauja/Koivu”:
    “ thus supporting the theory that the earliest Finnic expansion to northern Latvia dates no earlier than the second century AD. Before this Finnic southward expansion, the Baltic speaking area extended much further to the north, as evidenced by the words borrowed into Middle Proto-Finnic from North Baltic, that is, my proposed label for this otherwise unattested Baltic dialect (Kallio 2008).”
    Does he still hold on view that it was Southward expansion (rather than Northward) or had changed that in light of new data or Valter Lang’s theory?
    Kallio 2018 argues that in the "family tree" of South Estonian, Leivu was the first to split off. Leivu is a southern Estonian "island" spoken in the otherwise Latvian area (the name Leivu being a probable cognate of Liivi [Livonian], considering the Leivu sound change *ii > ei). As South Estonian itself was the first to split off from Proto-Finnic, this moves the area of deepest diversity in Finnic yet more southwards, which matches well with the Lang's synthesis.
    https://www.academia.edu/37987581/Va...A4nnehistoriaa

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jaska For This Useful Post:

     Nganasankhan (03-18-2021),  Ryukendo (02-28-2021)

Page 65 of 97 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Uralic
    By JoeyP37 in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-14-2021, 03:15 AM
  2. Replies: 160
    Last Post: 11-16-2020, 06:28 PM
  3. Ante Aikio on Proto-Uralic
    By anglesqueville in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 09-03-2019, 05:36 AM
  4. Eurogenes Uralic genes Analysis
    By J Man in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 09-26-2015, 01:20 PM
  5. Is there Tocharian influence in Uralic? Implications?
    By newtoboard in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-06-2015, 12:31 AM

Posting Permissions

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