Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: genetics&linguistics

Expand Messages
  • pielewe
    ... studies ... such a ... this ... like ... Others are better equipped than me to answer these questions, but I would like to make three points: (1) There is
    Message 1 of 3 , Feb 3, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "ytielts" <ytielts@...> wrote:

      > Would you put me through with some information about the genetic
      studies
      > you have done on different populations in the world, especially on
      > Northern Europeans. What kind of mutation has caused them to have
      such a
      > look as blond hair, blue eyes and white skin? When and where did
      this
      > mutation occur? Were the earliest indoeuropean speakers homogeneous
      like
      > Northeastern Chinese people? Were pre-indo-european population in
      > Northern Europe, if there were, identical with the indo-european
      > conquerors or not? [...]


      Others are better equipped than me to answer these questions, but I
      would like to make three points:

      (1) There is no old connection between the North European Pamela
      Anderson type and Indo-European. Indo-European is agreed to have
      arisen much more to the south-east (present-day Ukraine and present-
      day Turkey are probably the best guesses, personally I opt for the
      former) and is intrusive to northern Europe, where it must have
      replaced one or more ancestral languages. The precise sociological
      mechanism by which the Pamelas adopted Indo-European, and when they
      did, cannot be recovered, for lack of the necessary basic
      information. A very modest amount of information about Pamela
      language is retrievable in principle through the study of substratum
      phenomena in Germanic (and possibly also Saami).

      (2) I find reading genetic studies that try to incorporate linguistic
      data extremely frustrating because most geneticist, despite their
      incredible sophistication where their own stuff is concerned, have
      not moved one inch beyond the mid nineteenth-century as far as
      mechanisms of language spread are concerned. More specifically they
      tend to be distressingly unaware (or at least insufficiently aware)
      of the role of language shift in the spread of languages.
      Pronouncements of geneticists on language should therefore be read
      with extreme care.

      (3) Genetically homogeneous populations don't exist.


      Willem
    • ytielts
      ... on ... have ... homogeneous ... I ... present- ... they ... substratum ... linguistic ... they ... aware) ... Thanks a lot for answering my questions,
      Message 2 of 3 , Feb 3, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "pielewe" <wrvermeer@...> wrote:
        >
        > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "ytielts" <ytielts@> wrote:
        >
        > > Would you put me through with some information about the genetic
        > studies
        > > you have done on different populations in the world, especially
        on
        > > Northern Europeans. What kind of mutation has caused them to
        have
        > such a
        > > look as blond hair, blue eyes and white skin? When and where did
        > this
        > > mutation occur? Were the earliest indoeuropean speakers
        homogeneous
        > like
        > > Northeastern Chinese people? Were pre-indo-european population in
        > > Northern Europe, if there were, identical with the indo-european
        > > conquerors or not? [...]
        >
        >
        > Others are better equipped than me to answer these questions, but
        I
        > would like to make three points:
        >
        > (1) There is no old connection between the North European Pamela
        > Anderson type and Indo-European. Indo-European is agreed to have
        > arisen much more to the south-east (present-day Ukraine and
        present-
        > day Turkey are probably the best guesses, personally I opt for the
        > former) and is intrusive to northern Europe, where it must have
        > replaced one or more ancestral languages. The precise sociological
        > mechanism by which the Pamelas adopted Indo-European, and when
        they
        > did, cannot be recovered, for lack of the necessary basic
        > information. A very modest amount of information about Pamela
        > language is retrievable in principle through the study of
        substratum
        > phenomena in Germanic (and possibly also Saami).
        >
        > (2) I find reading genetic studies that try to incorporate
        linguistic
        > data extremely frustrating because most geneticist, despite their
        > incredible sophistication where their own stuff is concerned, have
        > not moved one inch beyond the mid nineteenth-century as far as
        > mechanisms of language spread are concerned. More specifically
        they
        > tend to be distressingly unaware (or at least insufficiently
        aware)
        > of the role of language shift in the spread of languages.
        > Pronouncements of geneticists on language should therefore be read
        > with extreme care.
        >
        > (3) Genetically homogeneous populations don't exist.
        >
        >
        > Willem
        >
        Thanks a lot for answering my questions, Willem. I am an
        anthropology lover, however, I have a lot of rudimental things I
        don't really get a hang of.
        (1) What do you mean by the North European Pamela Anderson type. Is
        it equivalent to the Cro-Magnon type. What about the pysical
        features of the Pamela type. Do they physically resemble with
        today's Northern Europeans? Did the original Indo-European speakers
        have blonde hair, blue eyes and white skin or Did Nordic people
        create the language as they say on some websites. Were all the
        original indo speakers blonde-haired, blue-eyed and white-skinned or
        did they vary in these three counts? If they did, how come? Let's
        take proto-Chinese speakers or Manchurin speakers as an analogy in
        this case. It is well documented that Xia(pronounced in Chinese
        group and Hua group were the first Chinese speakers or, say the
        Chinese language derive from the mixture of these two groups of
        people. Central China, the provinces such as shanxi(Where Terra
        Cotta has been found and Henan( The ruins of Shang Dynasty, which
        was chronolicalzed between 1766 and 1122 BC by Chinese scholars five
        years ago. A large number of human skulls have been excavated in
        Henan province. Most of them have been agreed to be the Mongoloid
        type. They must have been the early(not the first though) Chinese
        speakers. They displayed physical identity. So my question is
        whether or not the indigeneous in Northern Europe, or the Pamela
        tyep as you mentioned pysically resembled the indo intruders. It
        seems that today's Swedes are 90% blonde-haired, blue-eyed and white-
        skinned. So does that mean that the pamela type were physically
        identical with the new comers when they started to adopt the
        exdigeneous language?

        (2) You say that A very modest amount of information about Pamela
        language is retrievable in principle through the study of substratum
        phenomena in Germanic (and possibly also Saami). Can you go in
        details please? Do you mean that some words in Germanic subfamily
        fall out of the indo? If it does, please give me some examples?

        (3)I do want to read some reliable books that well incorporate
        archaeology, linguistics with genetics. Sometimes languages are not
        concerting with genes. However, I believe that languages mostly go
        with gene flows. To search for the origin and migration of the homo
        sapiens sapiens involves the efforts of the scientists in
        archaeology, linguistics and genetics altogether even though it is
        hard to bring them together. If the out-of africa theory is agreed
        with by most of the main stream antropolists, the pay-off will be
        worth the efforts. Agreed?
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.