Page 1 of 26 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 255

Thread: Patterson - Where Indo-European languages originated: Yamnaya or Maykop ?

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,334
    Sex
    Location
    Brazil
    Ethnicity
    Rio de Janeiro Colonial
    Nationality
    Brazilian
    Y-DNA (P)
    J1a1 FGC6064+ M365+
    mtDNA (M)
    H1ao1a

    Suebi Kingdom Portugal 1143 Portugal 1485 Portugal Order of Christ Brazilian Empire Brazil

    Patterson - Where Indo-European languages originated: Yamnaya or Maykop ?

    Patterson said that linguistic evidence has tracked the ancestral language, called “late proto-Indo-European” to about 3,500 years ago in the Caucasus, among a people who had wheeled vehicles at a time when they were just being put into use. Genetic evidence ruled out one likely related group in the region, the Yamnaya, because their DNA showed the group had hunter-gatherer ancestry, which is inconsistent with the fact that two Indo-European groups, Armenians and Indians, don’t share it, Patterson said. That made Patterson look south, to the Maikop civilization, which likely had significant contact with the Yamnaya, as a plausible culture where Indo-European languages originated. Samples have been obtained from Maikop burial sites, but the DNA work to test that proposal is pending, Patterson said.
    http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/stor...-of-europeans/

  2. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to RCO For This Useful Post:

     Angoliga (03-30-2016),  Hando (12-06-2014),  parasar (12-07-2014),  Rick (12-20-2014),  Silesian (12-07-2014)

  3. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    4,850
    Sex

    This really doesn't make much sense:

    Patterson said that linguistic evidence has tracked the ancestral language, called “late proto-Indo-European” to about 3,500 years ago in the Caucasus, among a people who had wheeled vehicles at a time when they were just being put into use.

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

     Agamemnon (12-06-2014),  Hando (12-06-2014)

  5. #3
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,334
    Sex
    Location
    Brazil
    Ethnicity
    Rio de Janeiro Colonial
    Nationality
    Brazilian
    Y-DNA (P)
    J1a1 FGC6064+ M365+
    mtDNA (M)
    H1ao1a

    Suebi Kingdom Portugal 1143 Portugal 1485 Portugal Order of Christ Brazilian Empire Brazil
    If Yamna had hunter-gatherer ancestry and the Southern Maykop culture had different features related to where Indo-European languages originated the movement would be from the South to the North. That would be very important in the point we are currently examining.

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to RCO For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-06-2014),  Rick (12-06-2014),  Silesian (12-07-2014)

  7. #4
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    4,498
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish & British
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-Z18271
    mtDNA (M)
    J1c5
    Y-DNA (M)
    R-U152
    mtDNA (P)
    U7a5

    Israel Israel Jerusalem United Kingdom England Scotland Isle of Man
    It's pretty obvious that Maykop influenced Yamnaya (and might be responsible for some of the Semitic-like and Kartvelian-like loans in PIE), but claiming that PIE itself originates in the Caucasus simply because Indians and Armenians allegedly don't share the aforementionned hunter-gatherer ancestry? Now that's downright nonsensical.
    I will never cease to be astounded by all the fancy theories some manage to come up with regarding the PIE urheimat, especially those based on non-linguistic conjecture.
    This issue (PIE urheimat) has already been settled, it's pretty clear from the linguistic evidence at hand that PIE was located on the Pontic-Caspian steppe c. 3,500 BCE and that the Yamna horizon provides the best archeological correlate, IE studies is a very old field of linguistics and the Pontic-Caspian steppe urheimat is a consensus. I sincerely fail to see what's so hard to understand about that, yet some manage to delude themselves into believing that population genetics is going to infirm linguistic evidence... Truth be told, this is very disappointing, not to say underwhelming, given the positive nature of the linguistic research some choose to ignore altogether.
    Last edited by Agamemnon; 12-06-2014 at 01:33 PM.
    מכורותיך ומולדותיך מארץ הכנעני אביך האמורי ואמך חתית
    יחזקאל פרק טז ג-


    ᾽Άλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν:
    κρύβδην, μηδ᾽ ἀναφανδά, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
    νῆα κατισχέμεναι: ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι πιστὰ γυναιξίν.


    -Αγαμέμνων; H Οδύσσεια, Ραψωδία λ

  8. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Agamemnon For This Useful Post:

     Erik (12-06-2014),  Hando (12-06-2014),  Jean M (12-06-2014),  rms2 (12-06-2014)

  9. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,334
    Sex
    Location
    Brazil
    Ethnicity
    Rio de Janeiro Colonial
    Nationality
    Brazilian
    Y-DNA (P)
    J1a1 FGC6064+ M365+
    mtDNA (M)
    H1ao1a

    Suebi Kingdom Portugal 1143 Portugal 1485 Portugal Order of Christ Brazilian Empire Brazil
    It's not a consensus, we have several different theories. I remember and always suspected of old "consensus" like R1b-R1a Paleolithic in Europe being completely debunked with trajectories and new data from places nobody would believe like Sundaland and Bhutan. Let's wait and see the results from archaeological/ancient DNA. I think the Caspian region, Eastern Anatolia and Northern Iran must be investigated in terms of Y DNA and autosomal DNA for the last 20000 years in order to understand what happened.

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to RCO For This Useful Post:

     Gravetto-Danubian (03-30-2016),  Silesian (12-07-2014),  XooR (03-29-2016)

  11. #6
    Registered Users
    Posts
    4,850
    Sex

    There is a consensus among most linguistics, and the fact that there are several different theories out there (most of which are really bad) doesn't mean there isn't a consensus.

    The argument that the Proto-Indo-Europeans didn't come from the Yamnaya culture because Armenians and Indians apparently don't carry any Eastern European hunter-gatherer ancestry is very naive.

    People can learn languages. They don't need to acquire certain genetic markers to do that, so both Armenians and Indians might have very little autosomal steppe ancestry and yet speak languages that originated on the steppe.

    If Patterson ever attempts to argue that Indo-Iranian came from the western Caucasus based on some genetic stats then it'll be pretty funny to watch.

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

     Agamemnon (12-06-2014),  DMXX (12-06-2014),  Hando (12-06-2014),  Jean M (12-06-2014),  lgmayka (12-09-2014)

  13. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    990
    Sex
    Omitted
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2a1

    Genetic evidence ruled out one likely related group in the region, the Yamnaya, because their DNA showed the group had hunter-gatherer ancestry
    There are several mtDNA U5 subclades that seem likely to have been present in proto-Indo-Europeans, which would suggest that they did have hunter-gatherer ancestry. In any case, I don't think the currently available ancient autosomal DNA evidence is conclusive. We need many more samples from different periods and locations. It's far too early to make definitive statements about the genetics of proto-Indo-Europeans.

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

     Agamemnon (12-06-2014),  Anglecynn (12-06-2014),  DMXX (12-06-2014),  Hando (12-06-2014),  Rick (12-06-2014)

  15. #8
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    4,498
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish & British
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-Z18271
    mtDNA (M)
    J1c5
    Y-DNA (M)
    R-U152
    mtDNA (P)
    U7a5

    Israel Israel Jerusalem United Kingdom England Scotland Isle of Man
    Quote Originally Posted by RCO View Post
    It's not a consensus, we have several different theories. I remember and always suspected of old "consensus" like R1b-R1a Paleolithic in Europe being completely debunked with trajectories and new data from places nobody would believe like Sundaland and Bhutan. Let's wait and see the results from archaeological/ancient DNA. I think the Caspian region, Eastern Anatolia and Northern Iran must be investigated in terms of Y DNA and autosomal DNA for the last 20000 years in order to understand what happened.
    You're comparing apples and oranges here quite frankly, I already said that IE studies is a very old field of linguistics (several centuries old) so that's not exactly comparable to a (barely) 10 year-old model implying that R1b emerged during the Palaeolithic era. Naturally, this means we've made a lot of progress and that we have a pretty good idea where the PIE urheimat was, that is to say that the consensus I'm referring to here isn't a mere theory but a paradigm.
    I'm gonna be bluntly honest here: Whoever disagrees with the Pontic-Caspian steppe urheimat probably doesn't know what he's talking about and should give serious consideration to avoid discussing such issues in the future.

    I'll just add that genetics & archeology (or any other field for that matter) cannot disprove or infirm linguistic observations since this topic is inherently tied to historical linguistics.
    Last edited by Agamemnon; 12-06-2014 at 06:02 PM.
    מכורותיך ומולדותיך מארץ הכנעני אביך האמורי ואמך חתית
    יחזקאל פרק טז ג-


    ᾽Άλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν:
    κρύβδην, μηδ᾽ ἀναφανδά, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
    νῆα κατισχέμεναι: ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι πιστὰ γυναιξίν.


    -Αγαμέμνων; H Οδύσσεια, Ραψωδία λ

  16. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Agamemnon For This Useful Post:

     DMXX (12-06-2014),  Hando (12-07-2014),  lgmayka (12-09-2014),  Motzart (12-06-2014)

  17. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    419
    Sex
    Location
    U.S
    Nationality
    Indian
    Y-DNA (P)
    Z30522+
    mtDNA (M)
    C4a1a (T195C!)

    India United States of America Chola Empire India Maratha Empire
    Looks like there are new results from Maykop coming up pretty soon based on that read. And that 3500years probably was supposed to be 3500 B.C. Also by hunter-gatherer I guess they mean WHG specifically.
    As it stands today, when it comes to archaeology, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Assigning ancient language to a location or genetics will always be a funny proposition.
    This game of revolving chairs will go on for some time...grab some popcorn and enjoy!
    Let the G-men rise and claim the title from the R-men... wonder who is next in line!
    Paternal YDNA: G-P303+ -> G-Z30522+
    Paternal mtDNA: U7a3b1
    Maternal YDNA: R-Z2123+ -> R-YP526+
    Maternal mtDNA: C4a1 (T195C!)

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

     Hando (12-07-2014)

  19. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    829
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Nepalese
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    C5a
    mtDNA (M)
    N1e'I

    Nepal United States of America
    Well, I see a lot of I's in the Armenian ftdna project:
    https://www.familytreedna.com/public...ction=yresults

    I think his method simply does not pick up WHG admixture.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to everest59 For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-07-2014)

Page 1 of 26 12311 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 235
    Last Post: 09-21-2021, 12:42 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-15-2020, 08:52 PM
  3. An interesting video on Indo-European languages
    By Piquerobi in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-14-2019, 11:21 AM
  4. Genetic origin of Indo-European languages?
    By hj111 in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-28-2018, 01:11 PM
  5. New paper on the origins of Indo-European Languages
    By Marmaduke in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 11-21-2013, 05:14 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
  •