Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: The Proto-IE Lexicon and Proto-Germanic Origins

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    Friday, June 18th, 2010 @ 02:54 PM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    Vandalic
    Ancestry
    Reidgotalandic
    Location
    Limes Germanicus
    Gender
    Posts
    941
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    13
    Thanked in
    13 Posts

    Lightbulb The Proto-IE Lexicon and Proto-Germanic Origins

    In the last thirty years, there has been an important breakthrough in the history of European origins. Continuity is now universally considered the basic pattern of European prehistory. The Proto-IE lexicon, i.e. the lexicon common to all IE languages reveals significant differences in the grammatical structure, disqualifying as meaningless any research aiming at reconstructing a universal monogenetic lexicon. There are, for instance, different words for "burying" in most IE languages. This must be seen as evidence that by the time ritual burying began, in Upper Paleolithic, IE groups were already differentiated. The so-called 'noa' names of the bear (i.e. replacing the tabooed real one) in the Celtic, Germanic, Baltic and Slavic languages, all differ from one another, thus indicating that by the time religious concern for hunted animals connected with totemism emerged in Upper Paleolithic (along with the earliest attestations of bear cult), IE languages were already differentiated.

    The differentiation process of IE languages from the Proto-IE common language, reconstructed by comparative linguistics, as well as that of their already separated branches (Proto-Celtic, Proto-Germanic, Proto-Italic, Proto-Balto-Slavic, Proto-Greek etc.) into their presently 'substandard', 'dialect' varieties, must have taken an extremely long time, and they must have been associated first with the varying episodes of the original migration from Africa, and then - with an increasingly faster tempo as social stratification and colonial wars began - with the varying cultural, social and political stages the new fragmented groups went through in the different settlement areas.

    The continental Germanic area must have extended, before the deglaciation, from the Alps to the icecap, including what are now the Frisian islands and part of the British islands. After the deglaciation, in Mesolithic, it expanded to Scandinavia (where its earlier, 'Mesolithic' stage is still best preserved).

    http://www.continuitas.com/intro.pdf

  2. #2
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Leofric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Monday, June 25th, 2018 @ 03:15 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    California California
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Gender
    Age
    40
    Zodiac Sign
    Aquarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Telecommunications
    Politics
    Libertarian/Neo-Imperialist
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    1,200
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    10
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Vingolf View Post
    Continuity is now universally considered the basic pattern of European prehistory.
    I don't know whether you're saying this yourself, or whether you're quoting the folks at Continuitas (it's been too long since I read their PDF for me to remember whether these are there words or not), but those folks actually represent sort of the bizarre fringe in Indo-European studies. Almost universally, Indo-Europeanists agree that the Indo-European languages (and, at least to some extent, the people and the culture) spread into most of, if not all of Europe well after the end of the Paleolithic.


    There are, for instance, different words for "burying" in most IE languages. This must be seen as evidence that by the time ritual burying began, in Upper Paleolithic, IE groups were already differentiated. The so-called 'noa' names of the bear (i.e. replacing the tabooed real one) in the Celtic, Germanic, Baltic and Slavic languages, all differ from one another, thus indicating that by the time religious concern for hunted animals connected with totemism emerged in Upper Paleolithic (along with the earliest attestations of bear cult), IE languages were already differentiated.
    You see, against these examples one must consider others like the full range of terms for domesticated animals, types of cereals and techniques for processing them, wool and its processing, and other terms which indicate a Neolithic period for differentiation. It's easier to explain variety in words for 'bear' and 'bury' together with a Neolithic differentiation time than to explain commonality in a host of agricultural terms together with a Paleolithic differentiation.

    As J.P. Mallory and D.Q. Adams say in their recent work The Oxford Introduction to Proto-Indo-European and the Proto-Indo-Europeans (2006), "Although claims are occasionally made — sometimes with an amazing sense of audacity — that Proto-Indo-European should date back to the Paleolithic or Mesolithic, periods before the advent of a mixed farming economy, such a dating can only be made if you ignore all the linguistic evidence to the contrary. Only archaeologists are likely to make such a gross mistake" (p. 102).

    Those authors are well-established and well-considered Indo-Europeanists writing this just last year. I think it's fairly safe to say that the thought that Proto-Indo-European began differentiating into the various daughters as early as the Paleolithic is not universally believed.

    The idea that Proto-Indo-European began to differentiate in the Neolithic in a localized area somewhat in the middle of the language family's extension in, say, AD 500, and then somehow spread to fill the area it came to fill, is much more universally agreed upon.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    Friday, June 18th, 2010 @ 02:54 PM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    Vandalic
    Ancestry
    Reidgotalandic
    Location
    Limes Germanicus
    Gender
    Posts
    941
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    13
    Thanked in
    13 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Leofric View Post
    I don't know whether you're saying this yourself, or whether you're quoting the folks at Continuitas
    I was merely paraphrasing the article I referred to. It is just one of many possible points of view.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leofric View Post
    Only archaeologists are likely to make such a gross mistake" (p. 102). [...] I think it's fairly safe to say that the thought that Proto-Indo-European began differentiating into the various daughters as early as the Paleolithic is not universally believed.
    The good thing about archaeologists is that they tend to include population genetics in their theories: "Studies of the variation among Y chromosomes in modern European poulations have been used to model the contribution of incoming males to European genetic make-up. They suggest a Near Eastern contribution of 85 percent in parts of eastern Europe, declining to 15 percent in the west. Whether this relates to demographic movements or simply reflects long-standing interconnections between adjacent pupulations remains to be established" (Chris Scarre (ed.), The Human Past: World Prehistory & the Development of Human Societies, London: Thames & Hudson 2005:398).

  4. #4
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Leofric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Monday, June 25th, 2018 @ 03:15 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    California California
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Gender
    Age
    40
    Zodiac Sign
    Aquarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Telecommunications
    Politics
    Libertarian/Neo-Imperialist
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    1,200
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    10
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Vingolf View Post
    I was merely paraphrasing the article I referred to.
    This is good to know. Thanks! I understand now.


    The good thing about archaeologists is that they tend to include population genetics in their theories: "Studies of the variation among Y chromosomes in modern European poulations have been used to model the contribution of incoming males to European genetic make-up. They suggest a Near Eastern contribution of 85 percent in parts of eastern Europe, declining to 15 percent in the west. Whether this relates to demographic movements or simply reflects long-standing interconnections between adjacent pupulations remains to be established" (Chris Scarre (ed.), The Human Past: World Prehistory & the Development of Human Societies, London: Thames & Hudson 2005:398).
    Overall, I agree (with you, that is — I neither agree nor disagree with Scarre, but I find it very interesting and I thank you for sharing it). However, genetic approaches alone can sometimes lead to conclusions that are linguistically untenable, just as linguistic approaches can sometimes lead to conclusions that are archaeologically untenable.

    I think the proper solution to problems like these requires being well-informed on a holistic level about the people being discussed — you have to consider their genes, their material culture, their language, and on and on in order to reach solid conclusions about origins of peoples and cultures.

    I think early linguists didn't do that well enough, but they wised up to their errors fairly well. By now, linguists approaching the problem tend to realize their need to rely on other experts in greater collaboration. It is unfortunate, however, that the views of the early linguists are the ones that became conventional wisdom among the masses.

    On the other hand, though, modern geneticists have a tendency to think that DNA is the answer to all their problems, and they ask far too much of it, overextending their data to draw very wide conclusions. They seem to have forgotten the need for collaboration with expertise in other fields to approach problems like these.

    From what I remember of the Continuitas folks, they have a tendency toward what I described in that last paragraph.

    Genetic data can definitely help us flesh out the picture, and I'm glad we're starting to include them as we approach these problems; but they can't paint the whole picture.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    Friday, June 18th, 2010 @ 02:54 PM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    Vandalic
    Ancestry
    Reidgotalandic
    Location
    Limes Germanicus
    Gender
    Posts
    941
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    13
    Thanked in
    13 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Leofric View Post
    I think the proper solution to problems like these requires being well-informed on a holistic level about the people being discussed — you have to consider their genes, their material culture, their language, and on and on in order to reach solid conclusions about origins of peoples and cultures.
    You're right: this field certainly requires an inter- and multidisciplinary approach.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leofric View Post
    I think early linguists didn't do that well enough, but they wised up to their errors fairly well. By now, linguists approaching the problem tend to realize their need to rely on other experts in greater collaboration. It is unfortunate, however, that the views of the early linguists are the ones that became conventional wisdom among the masses.
    This is a rather complicated subject, since ideology also has had (and still has) a significant impact. To some extent, I guess, science tends to mirror the Zeitgeist, the spirit of its age.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leofric View Post
    From what I remember of the Continuitas folks, they have a tendency toward what I described in that last paragraph.
    I suppose you're referring to followers of the so-called Paleolithic Continuity Theory? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoli...tinuity_Theory

    Quote Originally Posted by Leofric View Post
    Genetic data can definitely help us flesh out the picture, and I'm glad we're starting to include them as we approach these problems; but they can't paint the whole picture.
    You're right. But let's just take a look at the genetic data you mentioned, and how they interact and correspond with other data:

    "The present-day population of R1b in Western Europe are believed to be the descendants of a refugium in the Iberian peninsula (Portugal and Spain) at the Last Glacial Maximum, where the R1b1c haplogroup may have achieved genetic homogeneity. As conditions eased with the Allerød Oscillation in about 12,000 BC, descendants of this group migrated and eventually recolonised all of Western Europe, leading to the dominant position of R1b in variant degrees from Iberia to Scandinavia, so evident in haplogroup maps.

    The spread of Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup R1a1 is associated with the spread of the Indo-European languages too. Its defining mutation (M17) occurred about 10,000 to 14,000 years ago, before the PIE stage, so that its presence cannot be taken as a certain sign of Indo-European admixture.

    The mutations that characterize haplogroup R1b occurred ~30,000 years bp, whereas the mutations that characterize haplogroup R1a occurred ~10,000 years bp." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans )

  6. #6
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Saturday, June 11th, 2016 @ 01:27 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Subrace
    CM-Atlantidish
    Country
    England England
    State
    Lancashire Lancashire
    Location
    Mamvcivm
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Politics
    Nationalist
    Religion
    British
    Posts
    3,586
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    13
    Thanked in
    13 Posts
    I've almost finished reading Vere Gordon Child's "The Aryans" about this very problem. Has anyone else done so? It's good to go back to the 30s or whenever and compare how they wrote back then, and it's often humbling to see just how well they did with the limited data at their disposal.
    Child talks a lot about Kossinna's views in a quite respectful way, unlike the scorn we were taught to pour on him studying archaeology in the late 1990s. Anyone know of any links to Gustav Kossinna's works on the net? Probably worthwhile investigating. A handsome man at any rate:


    The Palaeolithic idea is of course untenable. I don't even need to go into detail to argue this, merely point out the glaring similarities in even distantly related IE languages in the present day, combined with the rate of change seen in the history of well documented IE languages since Classical times.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Resurgam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Monday, May 30th, 2011 @ 10:36 PM
    Ethnicity
    Cohee
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Pennsylvania Pennsylvania
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    electrical engineer
    Politics
    immoderate
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    186
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Ummm... They were descendants of Japtheth I think according to Martin Luther. :p

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Last Online
    Saturday, April 19th, 2008 @ 02:46 PM
    Age
    36
    Posts
    20
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Oswiu View Post

    The Palaeolithic idea is of course untenable. I don't even need to go into detail to argue this, merely point out the glaring similarities in even distantly related IE languages in the present day, combined with the rate of change seen in the history of well documented IE languages since Classical times.
    I think nowadays most of the linguists tend nowadays to put the data of Preindoeuropean split at 3000 before Christ, hardly any proposes elder dates (one can find an exception at www.lituanus.org1994_1/94_1_04.htm but this is a view I can hardly believe in).

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Last Online
    Monday, July 16th, 2012 @ 02:14 AM
    Ethnicity
    CeltoGermanic
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Alabama Alabama
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Family
    Married, happily
    Occupation
    Tree Wizard
    Religion
    Wotanist
    Posts
    431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    I find the Paleolithic Continuity Theory and the notion of fair features developing in the far north during the Paleolithic period to compliment each other ?

    First I present the following quotes of the above notions…

    Since the beginning of Comparative Philology, the origin of Indo-Europeans and their arrival in Euro-Asiatic, historical locations have been a controversial issue. Two major current theories suggest a late invasion from East Europe in the Bronze Age or a demic dispersion from Anatolia as consequence of early Neolithic civilization. There is, however, no archaeological evidence of invasions, European Neolithic is essentially a local development, and the latest outcome of genetic research demonstrates that 80% of European genetic stock goes back to Paleolithic. In addition, both archaeologists and linguists of the Uralic area now concur on a Paleolithic origin of Uralic people and languages in Eurasia.
    By using different approaches and through independent research, we have obtained converging evidence that indicates an uninterrupted, local continuity of Indo-European languages and populations from prehistoric to the present times. We argue that the appearance of Indo-Europeans coincides with the first regional settlement of Homo Sapiens Sapiens in the Middle/Upper Paleolithic, and we propose a comprehensive, interdisciplinary framework for the Indo-European origins, the Paleolithic Continuity Theory (PCT). And particularly the linguists of the workgroup find that the extraordinarily rich record of Indo-European languages and cultures can be read in a scientifically satisfactory way only in the light of the evolutionary depth and periodization scope provided by the PCT.

    http://www.continuitas.com/
    European hair and eye color: A case of frequency-dependent sexual selection?
    Peter Frost

    Abstract
    Human hair and eye color is unusually diverse in northern and eastern Europe. The many alleles involved (at least seven for hair color) and their independent origin over a short span of evolutionary time indicate some kind of selection. Sexual selection is particularly indicated because it is known to favor color traits and color polymorphisms. In addition, hair and eye color is most diverse in what used to be, when first peopled by hunter-gatherers, a unique ecozone of low-latitude continental tundra. This type of environment skews the operational sex ratio (OSR) of hunter-gatherers toward a male shortage in two ways: (1) men have to hunt highly mobile and spatially concentrated herbivores over longer distances, with no alternate food sources in case of failure, the result being more deaths among young men; (2) women have fewer opportunities for food gathering and thus require more male provisioning, the result being less polygyny. These two factors combine to leave more women than men unmated at any one time. Such an OSR imbalance would have increased the pressures of sexual selection on early European women, one possible outcome being an unusual complex of color traits: hair- and eye-color diversity and, possibly, extreme skin depigmentation.

    http://femininebeauty.info/peter.frost.pdf
    Now then I toss a nutshell..

    I would think that if fair features developed during the Paleolithic period it must have been the fore-bearers of the Germanic folks already there and it only makes sense that they spoke Proto-Germanic ?

    Maybe I just want Europe to be the Urheimat ?

    Thus the first human pair were created on the beach of an ocean. To which sea can the myth refer? The

    129


    question does not concern the ancient Aryan time, but the Teutonic antiquity, not Asia, but Europe; and if we furthermore limit it to the Christian era there can be but one answer. Germany was bounded in the days of Tacitus, and long before his time, by Gaul, Rhoetia, and Pannonia on the west and south, by the extensive territories of the Sarmatians and Dacians on the east, and by the ocean on the north. The so-called German Ocean, the North Sea and the Baltic, was then the only body of water within the horizon of the Teutons, the only one which in the days of Jordanes, after the Goths long had ruled north of the Black Sea, was thought to wash the primeval Teutonic strands. The myth must therefore refer to the German Ocean. It is certain that the borders of this ocean where the myth has located the creation of the first human pair, or the first Teutonic pair, was regarded as the centre from which their descendants spread over more and more territory. Where near the North Sea or the Baltic was this centre located?

    Even this question can be answered, thanks to the mythic fragments preserved. A feature common to all well-developed mythological systems is the view that the human race in its infancy was under the special protection of friendly divinities, and received from them the doctrines, arts, and trades without which all culture is impossible. The same view is strongly developed among the Teutons. Anglo-Saxon documents have rescued the story telling how Ask’s and Embla’s descendants received the first blessings of culture from the benign gods. The story has come to us through Christian hands, which,

    130


    however, have allowed enough of the original to remain to show that its main purpose was to tell us how the great gifts of culture came to the human race. The saga names the land where this took place. The country was the most southern part of the Scandinavian peninsula, and especially the part of it bordering on the western sea. Had these statements come to us only from northern sources, there would be good reason for doubting their originality and general application to the Teutonic tribes. The Icelandic-Norwegian middle-age literature abounds in evidence of a disposition to locate the events of a myth and the exploits of mythic persons in the author’s own land and town. But in this instance there is no room for the suspicion that patriotism has given to the southernmost part of the Scandinavian peninsula a so conspicuous prominence in the earliest history of the myth. The chief evidence is found in the traditions of the Saxons in England, and this gives us the best clue to the unanimity with which the sagas of the Teutonic continent, from a time prior to the birth of Christ far down in the middle ages, point out the great peninsula in the northern sea as the land of the oldest ancestors, in conflict with the scholastic opinion in regard to an emigration from Troy. The region where the myth located the first dawn of human culture was certainly also the place which was regarded as the cradle and centre of the race.

    Rydberg’s Teutonic Mythology
    Later,
    -Lyfing

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    Friday, June 18th, 2010 @ 02:54 PM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    Vandalic
    Ancestry
    Reidgotalandic
    Location
    Limes Germanicus
    Gender
    Posts
    941
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    13
    Thanked in
    13 Posts
    About 80% of the European genes descend from the small groups of humans that sought refuge from ice in a few scattered areas during the LGM, namely in northern Spain, in central Europe and Ukraine. Because of drift, these populations during the long period of glaciation differentiated from each other. Thus, the present European populations harbour different genetic components that originated in distant locations.

    In a Scandinavian context, there is no evidence for a swift replacement of the hunter-gatherer economy. The data available seem to indicate population continuity, acculturation and acceptance of new ideas rather than migration and population replacement in the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition. Archaeological evidence suggests that the core of the oldest populations colonising Scandinavia 11 000-12 000 thousand years ago came from Germany. The present German gene pool shows a high frequency of Eu7 and Eu18 haplotypes. These haplotypes also account for about 75% of the Norwegian Y chromosome pool. MtDNA and Y chromosome analyses also show a strong similarity between Norwegians and central European populations.

    The frequency of the Y chromosome binary defined haplotypes suggests that, at least from the male perspective, the genetic pool of the Norwegians is mainly composed of genes that were present in Europe as early as the Palaeolithic. Haplogroups with the M170 mutation (defining haplogroup I) and the M173 mutation (defining haplogroup R1*) have been present in Europe since the palaeolithic period.

    The most common haplogroup in Sweden and Norway is I1a*, showing a decreasing gradient from Scandinavia towards both the east (Ural) and the west (Atlantic), and Western Europe has been suggested as the source of the Scandinavian I1a*.

    The mutation determining R1*(xR1a1) probably originated 35.000 - 40.000 years ago in Western Europe. R1*(xR1a1) is frequent in western Europe, with a decreasing frequency towards the east while R1a1 has the opposite pattern with a high frequence in the east and a decreasing occurrence in the west.

    The Swedish population has frequencies similar to other Scandinavian populations (Danes, Norwegians) and has a higher frequency of the western haplogroups R1*(xR1a1) compared with haplogroup R1a1.


    Sources:

    http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v.../5201651a.html

    http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v.../5200834a.html

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Difference Between Proto-Norse and Proto-Germanic?
    By Eberhardt in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Tuesday, June 26th, 2018, 07:30 AM
  2. Pre-Proto-Germanic Substratum in Proto-Slavic
    By Hauke Haien in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Tuesday, June 26th, 2018, 06:05 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Saturday, July 2nd, 2016, 02:30 AM
  4. Proto-Germanic Learning Resources?
    By Herewulf in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Sunday, July 24th, 2011, 07:45 AM
  5. Replies: 9
    Last Post: Monday, March 5th, 2007, 05:19 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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