tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post1160643420417638521..comments2024-03-09T15:46:44.638+01:00Comments on For what they were... we are: The graffiti of Iruña-Veleia, a free online e-book by J.M. Elexpuru (in Basque)Majuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comBlogger133125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-14531630046027961992011-07-23T17:29:02.911+02:002011-07-23T17:29:02.911+02:00Comments in this entry are closed. And seriously, ...Comments in this entry are closed. And seriously, Octavià, I do not like you, your "humor" nor your freaky "theories".Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-90821345409334736032011-07-23T16:51:03.792+02:002011-07-23T16:51:03.792+02:00@ Octavià
“For example, you made the crude mistake...@ Octavià<br />“For example, you made the crude mistake that Spanish ll- was "without exception" derived from Latin pl-. What else could I expect from someone who "did good studies"?”<br />I didn’t reply to you when you asked me, but I did mean: ll- is due to Latin Cl-, mostly pl- a few fl- and cl-. The theory of Corominas that it could be due to li- after diphthongization of -e- I should deepen. You of course know Spanish better than me, but why liebre isn’t *llebre or liendre isn’t *llendre or lienzo isn’t *llenzo?Gioiellohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13578860964923773647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-84537603691119821932011-07-23T16:00:15.840+02:002011-07-23T16:00:15.840+02:00This is totally freaky. This is the paleolithic co...<i>This is totally freaky. This is the paleolithic continuity nonsense hiding the name.</i><br />By no means. While PCT expliciyly <i>negates</i> language replacement and so predicates a kind of linguistic "immobilism", I think there actually were not one but <i>several</i> processes of this kind over an extended time period. <br /><br /><i>I have only one thing to say to IEPC freaks: get lost and do not come back ever. You are insulting. You go to your blog and I stay at my blog. I do not want a single IEPC freak here. Is that clear?</i><br />Are you sure you aren't confusing this with "IPCC" (Intergovernamental Panel on Climate Change)? :-))<br /><br />I'd suggest you take some time outdoors and refresh your brain cells.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-3037463787762560602011-07-23T15:52:16.482+02:002011-07-23T15:52:16.482+02:00This comment has been removed by the author.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-16008261259059597172011-07-23T15:45:30.000+02:002011-07-23T15:45:30.000+02:00“Are you linking then the development of the word ...<i>“Are you linking then the development of the word 'plough' in some European languages from the verb 'to sail' because of Cardial culture expansion from Italy?”<br />I didn’t mind on this. This could be a consequence, due to your observations. I did above all theories about Genetics and Genetics of the populations.</i><br />But you should be aware that unless we could link Celts and Greeks (i.e. people <b>*pleu-</b> refers to sailing) with the Cardial culture (something extremely unlikely), this hypothsis has no sense.<br /><br />Actually, these 'plough' words refer to the <i>iron</i> plough, an invention which rapidly diffused by much of the Europe north of the Alps. This new techonology was created by Iron Age people whose language, if not Celtic as Alinei thinks, would be at least a close relative.<br /><br /><i>I could say that I did good studies and I don’t know if the youngest did the same. Important is the method, if someone has one.</i><br />The problem is you don't "practice linguistics" (as yourself recognized), and practice is extremely importance for any kind of study, and specially languages. <br /><br />For example, you made the crude mistake that Spanish <b>ll-</b> was "without exception" derived from Latin <b>pl-</b>. What else could I expect from someone who "did good studies"?Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-64016860437963269352011-07-23T15:39:29.973+02:002011-07-23T15:39:29.973+02:00"Apparently, you forgot about the Old Europea..."Apparently, you forgot about the Old European Hydronymy (OEH) and the Italoid toponymy"...<br /><br />Apparently you forgot of archaeology.<br /><br />"... the historical IE languages are actually multi-layer, that is, the result of superposition of several language replacement processes since the Mesolithic until the Bronze Age".<br /><br />What?!<br /><br />This is totally freaky. This is the paleolithic continuity nonsense hiding the name. <br /><br />I have only one thing to say to IEPC freaks: get lost and do not come back ever. You are insulting.<br /><br />You go to your blog and I stay at my blog. I do not want a single IEPC freak here. Is that clear?Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-44421587746827697372011-07-23T15:36:02.618+02:002011-07-23T15:36:02.618+02:00Italy is in the loop but it's not the origin o...Italy is in the loop but it's not the origin of Cardium Pottery. The fact that we can find E-V13 and I2a tells us about the West Balcans. G2a and J2 are also from the same wave surely. <br /><br />A single Y-DNA won't tell much. Much less from Ötzi, who is of such a late time. And you don't have anything to support an origin of R1a in Italy of all places (it's from South Asia probably).Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-83748668316115997112011-07-23T15:32:56.264+02:002011-07-23T15:32:56.264+02:00@ Octavia
“I'd also recommend you read more re...@ Octavia<br />“I'd also recommend you read more recent bibliography on the subject, because the works you've quoted are largely outdated”<br /><br /> I could say that I did good studies and I don’t know if the youngest did the same. Important is the method, if someone has one.<br /><br />“"Fundamental" for what purpose?””<br /><br />Of course the answer about the Refugium: if we’ll find in Italy Ötzi = R1b1b2-P312* or some subclade thought by many (Klyosov, Nordtvedt etc.) 2000 years old (Ötzi lived 5300YBP) etc. evidently there will be someone who was right and someone who was wrong.Gioiellohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13578860964923773647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-12184555091502075832011-07-23T15:21:52.169+02:002011-07-23T15:21:52.169+02:00I don’t practice linguistics, but if someone incit...<i>I don’t practice linguistics, but if someone incites me, I am always ready to give my contribute.</i><br />Thanks Gioeillo, this statement tells me all about. I'd also recommend you read more recent bibliography on the subject, because the works you've quoted are largely outdated.<br /><br /><i>For me fundamental is the origin of the haplogroup R1b1b2.</i><br />"Fundamental" for what purpose? As I said, you tend to leave readers to guess what you actually mean.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-54891004135471611902011-07-23T15:13:42.144+02:002011-07-23T15:13:42.144+02:00@ Octavià
“Are you linking then the development of...@ Octavià<br />“Are you linking then the development of the word 'plough' in some European languages from the verb 'to sail' because of Cardial culture expansion from Italy?”<br />I didn’t mind on this. This could be a consequence, due to your observations. I did above all theories about Genetics and Genetics of the populations. Of course I did my studies in linguistics, above all the theory of the monogenesis of the language of Alfredo Trombetti, and certainly my knowledge in this field helped me for my theories about Genetics, but I don’t practice linguistics, but if someone incites me, I am always ready to give my contribute.Gioiellohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13578860964923773647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-88478530375424397762011-07-23T15:09:05.006+02:002011-07-23T15:09:05.006+02:00But in Italy again we find the Celts, of all the e...<i>But in Italy again we find the Celts, of all the ethnic mosaic, in a mostly non-coastal area with no particular interest in sailing.</i><br />But Celts certainly across the Atlantic, including the Celtic Sea and the Bay of Biscay, usually called "Mar Cantábrico" by Spanish imperialists.<br /><br /><i>However I do find interesting that the paper mentions very old Neolithic dates (cereals) for Arenaza and Mirón caves, what may explain why Cantabrians and specifically Pasiegos have so high "Neolithic" genetic markers,</i><br />And more specifically, the E1b1b1b1 (E-M81) Y-chromosome haplogroup which has a high frequency among Berbers.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-72939057144837091072011-07-23T14:56:18.529+02:002011-07-23T14:56:18.529+02:00I have said many times that we can only make theor...<i>I have said many times that we can only make theories, but the answer will come from the aDNA. [...] The diffusion of the Cardial people from Italy (autochthonous agriculturaists) is a part of this theory. Why to discuss? I think we all have to wait for the aDNA.</i><br />Are you linking then the development of the word 'plough' in some European languages from the verb 'to sail'<br />because of Cardial culture expansion from Italy?<br /><br />Why didn't you mention this in the first place? Excuse me, Gioiello, but you tend to compress (so to speak) your writings very much and so you left readers to "guess" many things you don't explictily mentioned. Perhaps if you could develop a little more your point, people would understood you with less effort from their part.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-14635406223706912382011-07-23T14:46:03.964+02:002011-07-23T14:46:03.964+02:00"Atlantic Bronze was already Celtic-speaking&...<i>"Atlantic Bronze was already Celtic-speaking".<br /><br />Can't be. IEs were still East of the Rhine, except for the Urnfield "tongue" to Catalonia.</i><br />Apparently, you forgot about the Old European Hydronymy (OEH) and the Italoid toponymy, both of them found in the Iberian Peninsula (I refer you to Villar's books for more details).<br /><br /><i>You have been too exposed to "paleolithic continuity nonsense" (no need to debunk: it's plainly idiotic) it seems to me.</i><br />LOL. No, it's you who has been infected with Vennemann's "Vasconic" virus. :-)<br /><br />Of course, the PCT can't be accepted at face value but it still contains a strain of the truth.<br /><br /><i>Or you may happen to believe that IE is an Neolithic tongue, in line with Renfrew (debunked above).</i><br />IMHO, IE is part of a larger Mesolithic dialectal continuum once spoken in Eurasia.<br /><br /><i>We cannot discuss Bronze or Iron Age if we disagree on the very origins of Indoeuropean, we cannot discuss anything but the origins and expansion of Indoeuropean itself. That is first, until we agree on the origins and expansion patterns of IE, on which you are terribly evasive, we cannot debate anything else.</i><br />I disagree. The problem are your own pre-conceptions which associate some archaeological horizons with some languages.<br /><br /><i>But for you it seems easier not to deal with this key aspect. Spare me until you do.</i><br />I've already given you my answer: the historical IE languages are actually <i>multi-layer</i>, that is, the result of superposition of several language replacement processes since the Mesolithic until the Bronze Age.<br /><br />IMHO, trying to explain the actual IE dialectal fragmentation as the result of a single expansion is as wrong as the immobilism of the PCT.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-50729276133722048332011-07-23T14:43:20.469+02:002011-07-23T14:43:20.469+02:00@ Octavià&Maju
“But which is exactly your poin...@ Octavià&Maju<br />“But which is exactly your point?”<br />I have said many times that we can only make theories, but the answer will come from the aDNA. Of course I am waiting for the 20-22 October, when the genome of Ötzi with his Y will be published. I invite you all to do your hypothesis on www.worldfamilies.net. I did it.<br />For me fundamental is the origin of the haplogroup R1b1b2. You know that there was an ancient origin (Palaeolithic Franco-Cantabrian Refugium). The newest, and the most followed so far, is Neolithic Middle east or Asia Minor. I probably was the first, many years ago, to speak of an Italian Refugium (Younger Dryas Alpine zone): not only R1b1 etc, but also R1a/M420, many mt-s, amongst then my K1a… etc.<br />The diffusion of the Cardial people from Italy (autochthonous agriculturaists) is a part of this theory. Why to discuss? I think we all have to wait for the aDNA.Gioiellohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13578860964923773647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-16424649461999871792011-07-23T14:36:39.863+02:002011-07-23T14:36:39.863+02:00"But Genoese certainly were, and Italians too..."But Genoese certainly were, and Italians too, beginning from Etruscans".<br /><br />Beginning from at least Cardium Pottery. All we may discuss about Cardium Pottery is related with Italy and the Sea (however they ultimate origin is in the Western Balcans, at the other side of the Adriatic Sea). <br /><br />But in Italy again we find the Celts, of all the ethnic mosaic, in a mostly non-coastal area with no particular interest in sailing. Italics either don't seem to have been sailors until Romans decided consciously and politically to get into the naval arms race with Phoenicians, Greeks and Etruscans and copied ships from these ethnicities (and later from Illyrians too).Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-75477985087475343092011-07-23T14:25:40.737+02:002011-07-23T14:25:40.737+02:00I was referring to your last words: “But IMHO it m...<i>I was referring to your last words: “But IMHO it makes sense the word 'plough' in other languages was also derived from this root, as a plough cuts through earth in the same way than a rudder cuts through water. So this would be a sea-faring word adapted in dry land”.</i><br />Yes, I supposed that. But which is exactly your point? I still don't see it.<br /><br /><i>But you should read the paper, an open access, discussed also on “Dienekes’ Anthropology blog” on May this year. Also Maju took part in it.</i><br />As usual, you didn't include the link. Here it is: http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/05/death-of-acculturation-as-model-for.htmlOctavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-35594208796352454932011-07-23T14:20:09.741+02:002011-07-23T14:20:09.741+02:00"Atlantic Bronze was already Celtic-speaking&..."Atlantic Bronze was already Celtic-speaking".<br /><br />Can't be. IEs were still East of the Rhine, except for the Urnfield "tongue" to Catalonia. You have been too exposed to "paleolithic continuity nonsense" (no need to debunk: it's plainly idiotic) it seems to me. Or you may happen to believe that IE is an Neolithic tongue, in line with Renfrew (debunked above). <br /><br />We cannot discuss Bronze or Iron Age if we disagree on the very origins of Indoeuropean, we cannot discuss anything but the origins and expansion of Indoeuropean itself. That is first, until we agree on the origins and expansion patterns of IE, on which you are terribly evasive, we cannot debate anything else. <br /><br />But for you it seems easier not to deal with this key aspect. Spare me until you do.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-6530301240938577302011-07-23T14:13:28.552+02:002011-07-23T14:13:28.552+02:00I cannot agree with what the authors say in Westwa...I cannot agree with what the authors say in Westward Ho!:<br /><br />"In conclusion, the Cardial phenomenon is an immeasurably sharper event than was understood 20 years ago. In its new guise it conforms with what we would expect from a migration: cultural derivation from northwest Italy, not the local Mesolithic; a very rapid spread, with the transplantation of the entire agricultural system; and the means in place to assure its spread and survival".<br /><br />First of all the Cardial culture (and not "phenomenon") originates in the West Balcans, not Italy, which is also a destination. In Italy as in West Europe, most Cardial sites are characterized for local epipaleolithic toolkits, what implies demic continuity. There are Cardial colonies (specially in Valencia and Alacant provinces, and of course the islands) but not so many overall. <br /><br />Second, Epicardial is still not clearly well fit with Cardial. There's a lot of uncertainty about the various Epicardials, some of which may be even older than Cardial (see <a href="http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com/2011/05/neolithic-of-nerja-and-almagra-pottery.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>).<br /><br />As I understand it, Cardium Pottery culture is just a backbone, so to say around which a lot of stuff happens, (beginning with most of Cardial proper being aboriginal semi-aculturized and not colonizing). <br /><br />However I do find interesting that the paper mentions very old Neolithic dates (cereals) for Arenaza and Mirón caves, what may explain why Cantabrians and specifically Pasiegos have so high "Neolithic" genetic markers, while Basques east of the Nerbioi do not (Santimamiñe's date for Neolithic are of 1400 years later).Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-28669503610333143292011-07-23T14:07:28.625+02:002011-07-23T14:07:28.625+02:00@ Octavià
This is explained very well [...]
What&#...@ Octavià<br />This is explained very well [...]<br />What's "this"? Please explain.<br />I was referring to your last words: “But IMHO it makes sense the word 'plough' in other languages was also derived from this root, as a plough cuts through earth in the same way than a rudder cuts through water. So this would be a sea-faring word adapted in dry land”.<br />But you should read the paper, an open access, discussed also on “Dienekes’ Anthropology blog” on May this year. Also Maju took part in it.<br /><br />@ Maju<br /><br />“I say that Celts are not known for their sailing abilities”<br /><br />But Genoese certainly were, and Italians too, beginning from Etruscans.Gioiellohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13578860964923773647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-53635434450814559992011-07-23T14:06:43.916+02:002011-07-23T14:06:43.916+02:00I say that Celts are not known for their sailing a...<i>I say that Celts are not known for their sailing abilities, what doesn't mean that they did not boat in absolute terms, specially once they absorbed the peoples of the Atlantic shores into their ethnic identity.</i><br />I written an article in my blog about the Celtic word for 'boat', which is of Vasco-Caucasian origin:<br /> http://vasco-caucasian.blogspot.com/2011/03/boats-and-vessels.html<br /><br /><i>What is clear is that the Atlantic Bronze Area, which is the last remnant of Megalithic Sea connections was finally dismantled when Celts conquered West Iberia (from the Plateau, and this one from the Ebro). For all that is ranted about Iberia-Ireland/Britain connections, there is zero archaeological evidence in the times when the Celts are known to have been in either area: since the 7th century in Iberia and the 3rd century in the islands. Nothing!</i><br />IMHO the "traditional" view is totally wrong and the Atlantic Bronze was already Celtic-speaking. Also the actual distribution of historical Celtic languages (which includes at least two different groups in the Iberian Peninsula) indicates a deeper chronology.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-34177788278054336992011-07-23T13:38:57.101+02:002011-07-23T13:38:57.101+02:00I say that Celts are not known for their sailing a...I say that Celts are not known for their sailing abilities, what doesn't mean that they did not boat in absolute terms, specially once they absorbed the peoples of the Atlantic shores into their ethnic identity. <br /><br />What is clear is that the Atlantic Bronze Area, which is the last remnant of Megalithic Sea connections was finally dismantled when Celts conquered West Iberia (from the Plateau, and this one from the Ebro). For all that is ranted about Iberia-Ireland/Britain connections, there is zero archaeological evidence in the times when the Celts are known to have been in either area: since the 7th century in Iberia and the 3rd century in the islands. Nothing!Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-25158682762393568942011-07-23T12:25:00.506+02:002011-07-23T12:25:00.506+02:00Very interesting article: http://www.jstor.org/sta...Very interesting article: <i>http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/658368</i>. perhaps Maju would like to devote it a post. Intrestingly, you can see a photograph of Irish people carrying pigs in <b>curragh</b>, a kind of boat. Who said Celts weren't good sailors?<br /><br />Also: <i>A more recent suggestion is that Basque, normally regarded as unrelated to any other language, may in fact have connections with other linguistic isolates, including some languages spoken in the mountains of the Caucasus, and with Burushaski, spoken in northern Pakistan. Some of the suggested connections refer to domestic cattle, sheep, and goats, to cultivated cereals, and to milking and tillage. This could imply that Basque is Europe’s sole remnant of a pre-Indo-European language family that spread with the first agriculturalists (Bengtson 2009).</i><br /> This is the core of the Vasco-Caucasian hypothesis and much in accordance with my own ideas.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-4086763145774194502011-07-23T12:09:42.884+02:002011-07-23T12:09:42.884+02:00According to Matasović's (where I coudn't ...<i>According to Matasović's (where I coudn't find the Old Irish form), the Celtic reflex of IE <b>*pleu-</b> 'to swim, to float' is precisely <b>*φlowjo-, *φlowjā</b> 'rudder'.</i><br />But these are nominal derivates from the verbal root <b>*φlow-j-</b>, apparently only attested in Goidelic (cfr. Greek <b>pléō</b> 'I sail' < <b>*pléwō</b>). Also the adduced Latin and Germanic cognates i Mallory-Adams belongs to a quasi-homonymous root <b>*plōu-</b> 'to pour, to wash'.<br /><br /><i>This is explained very well [...]</i><br />What's "this"? Please explain.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-22369113424989160082011-07-23T11:59:34.091+02:002011-07-23T11:59:34.091+02:00This is explained very well in the paper of Peter ...This is explained very well in the paper of Peter Rowley-Conwy, Westward Ho! The Spread of Agriculture from Central Europe to the Atlantic, Current Anthropology, Volume 52, Number S4, October 2011<br /> (but published online on 13 V 2011), above all in “Cardial Colonists and Colonization” and it doesn’t seem in contrast with my theories.Gioiellohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13578860964923773647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-90190614926322828722011-07-22T22:32:16.451+02:002011-07-22T22:32:16.451+02:00I feel myself a friend of you all and don’t like t...<i>I feel myself a friend of you all and don’t like this way to discuss, then I agree with you: “I'd suggest we don't discuss this any further”.</i><br />I'm sorry if I've been too harsh before.<br /><br /><i>“Another word for ‘swim’</i><br />'To swim' isn't exactly the same thing than 'to move'.<br /><br /><i>Note: Oir luȉd ‘moves’, which anyway is linked with “to move’, Lat mouere.</i><br />Please notice this meaning isn't attested elsewhere and also the Latin word has a different etymology.<br /><br />According to Matasović's (where I coudn't find the Old Irish form), the Celtic reflex of IE <b>*pleu-</b> 'to swim, to float' is precisely <b>*φlowjo-, *φlowjā</b> 'rudder'. <br /><br />But IMHO it makes sense the word 'plough' in other languages was also derived from this root, as a plough cuts through earth in the same way than a rudder cuts through water. So this would be a sea-faring word adapted in dry land.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.com