It's bizarre to read arguments against the reconstructability of the PIE vocabulary in a paper that is itself an elaborate reconstruction of PIE's development over 8,000 years. It feels like they suddenly have a very different standard of evidence when it comes to certain words they don't like. But when it comes to their own elaborate reconstruction, suddenly the standard shifts in their favor. Hard not to notice it.
Current model of classifying IE languages has issues, we have language these separate branches like Albanian Greek and Armenian. If some language is separate branch, it means it is quite old and remain of some older language form.
“Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology” is a highly respected institution. Their data driven research should be applauded in a field where opinions usually dominated the research areas. The gaps in our knowledge then were filled with popular images of Indo-Europeans conquering lands and spreading culture and knowledge. MPI EVA’s research is in conflict with the imagined glorified history of the Indo-European peoples but their theory better explains the existence of Indo-European languages in Iranian plateau, Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent. In a way this sounds like some territorial concessions for the IE family; which is a good thing: the first step to recovery is accepting the reality.
@@LearnHittite I guess we are going to have wait for the follow up papers to learn the implications of their findings: “Hybrid origins” seem to suggest some creolization occurred in IE languages. If that is the case this would have implications on PIE peoples as to whether they formed an ethnolinguistic unity. PIE “urheimat” would also become a questionable notion. De-emphasizing step origins for PIE languages could re-kindle some research activity on the possible other proto languages spoken in the steps as opposed to assuming that every ancient/prehistoric culture of note spoke a PIE language.
@@LearnHittite the biggest problem that I have seen is that the experts in the field don't ask experts in statistics to do the analysis. This is not just a linguistics problem but seems to pervade most research sadly. Would be a cool video to talk to a research statistition about how reliable this data is.
The sun disc and the moon disc is the answer to Starostin. Facilitate movement for the gods and the humans by many means. Look for Trundholm Sun Chariot. Mehrgarh wheel amulet or the wheel sign in indus valley. Aten sun disc. Helios being driven by chariots. And many more examples in many cultures. The polysemy is very abundant and you don't even need the word wheel or move for it, the answer or the semantics predates that.
I thought *kwel- was about turning around? // Most early ceramic ware was hand-built using a simple coiling technique in which clay was rolled into long threads that were then pinched and smoothed together to form the body of a vessel. In the coiling method of construction, all the energy required to form the main part of a piece is supplied indirectly by the hands of the potter. Early ceramics built by coiling were often placed on mats or large leaves to allow them to be worked more conveniently. The evidence of this lies in mat or leaf impressions left in the clay of the base of the pot. This arrangement allowed the potter to rotate the vessel during construction, rather than walk around it to add coils of clay. The oldest forms of the potter's wheel (called tourneys or slow wheels) were probably developed as an extension to this procedure. Tournettes, in use around 3500 BC in the Near East, were turned slowly by hand or by foot while coiling a pot. Only a small range of vessels were fashioned on the tournette, suggesting that it was used by a limited number of potters. // It doesn't facilitate transport, but it does facilitate a particular type of production.
Regarding *Kwel- it depends on what source you're consulting, Pokorny had it as 'turning' I believe, PIE lexicon project has it as 'move'. Some IE languages have derived terms from *kwel seemingly more related to movement than turning. OI 'búachaill', herder, or lit. cow mover (I could be wrong though on that). Although the point made by Kassian was rather connected to the semantic shift from abstract to concrete that Heggarty was proposing.
The new German DNA and Linguistic results show PIE spread from Northern Mesopotamia Arc which is Kurdish populated region from antiquity till today. I would say it is better to do some redesign Kurdish and compare it with Hitites, Luwian and other languages where you will find fascinating results.
What do you think of the names in the linguistic supplement to Damgaard et al. (Kroonen et al. 2018) §2.3 from Armi (location uncertain) in Ebla 25th c. BCE? Alaluwadu, Aliluwada, Aliwada, Aliwadu, Aluwada, Aluwadu, Arzitála, Bamiadu, Bawiadu, Duduwašu, Haáštilu, Hudašu, Mimiadu, Muluwadu, Tar₅hili, and Ùlamadu. They say they use the Anatolian endings -(w)anda/u, -(w)aššu, -tala, and -ili/u. I'm not sure whether the absence of the n in wanda/u is supposed to be phonetic or graphical. The authors' conclusions are all over the place; I'm just more curious whether these names remind you of Hittite names that you have been reading.
Great question- those are Hittite name endings yes but I think the ultimate answer will depend on an analysis of those names in the armi Eblaite texts in regard to (proto) Hurrian, Hattic, Eblaite and other nearby/contemporary languages. I'd need to look at the Eblaite cuneiform because you know, how signs are interpreted can make a big difference and I know zero about Eblaite 😅 but the absence of the 'n' needs investigation, in my opinion, because '-ata' and '-atu' are two Hurrian name endings. Hurrian does differentiate between voiced and unvoiced, but, as pointed out in the paper, Eblaite apparently doesn't always do so. 'ili-ilu' is also attested according to Sasson, 1974, in his list of Hurrian names from Mari, Syria. We know so little about Hattic that some Hittoid names might actually be misinterpreted Hattic ones (pointed out by Kloekhorst in 'Kanišite Hittite'). Not forgetting that the most likely explanation is that they are in fact semitic names. And just because those endings are attested in Hittoid personal names from the Old Assyrian period doesn't mean they are Anatolian in origin - Kanis was a melting pot of different speakers. And unless I missed it, -aššu isn't mentioned in the Archi text they quoted. Maybe it was in the Bonechi text. But I'm sure Kroonen and colleagues took all this into consideration, so I defer to their expertise. However, considering the significance of their conclusions, if true, I think we need a more thorough analysis through Semitic and Hurrian. Personally, I'm not knowledgeable enough on either to have a definitive opinion.
Aluwada does sound Luwian. I assume this was the list of names that Barjamovic and Kroonen claimed to have found in the tablets of Ebla, describing several individuals of a kingdom named Arma(?). Interesting though that in Kanišite Hittite, Kloekhorst was referencing about it but gave no further detail about it as the original claimers did not explain their findings. I'll check the book again
Ah, thank you! Now that you mention it, the first six names remind me of that most popular name from over a thousand years later, Alyattes etc., said to have also been the possible origin of Goliath. Wiktionary says that in Lydian it's walwetes, and walwe means lion and comes from PIE wlkwos "wolf." Neat!
The data doesn't suggest a new homeland though, it suggests a hybrid model of two theories that have been around for a long time so I don't see your point?
@@LearnHittite Actually the paper does suggest a new homeland. That is the Fertile Crescent, and has PIE there at circa 8000 BP then a branch migrated to the Ukraine Steppe at circa 7000 BP, and into the rest of Europe at circa 5000 BP.
@@forest3064😂 Heggarty and colleagues give a south of the Caucasus origin and that idea has been around formally since the eighties so there is nothing new in that regard
It's bizarre to read arguments against the reconstructability of the PIE vocabulary in a paper that is itself an elaborate reconstruction of PIE's development over 8,000 years. It feels like they suddenly have a very different standard of evidence when it comes to certain words they don't like. But when it comes to their own elaborate reconstruction, suddenly the standard shifts in their favor. Hard not to notice it.
Current model of classifying IE languages has issues, we have language these separate branches like Albanian Greek and Armenian. If some language is separate branch, it means it is quite old and remain of some older language form.
“Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology” is a highly respected institution. Their data driven research should be applauded in a field where opinions usually dominated the research areas. The gaps in our knowledge then were filled with popular images of Indo-Europeans conquering lands and spreading culture and knowledge. MPI EVA’s research is in conflict with the imagined glorified history of the Indo-European peoples but their theory better explains the existence of Indo-European languages in Iranian plateau, Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent. In a way this sounds like some territorial concessions for the IE family; which is a good thing: the first step to recovery is accepting the reality.
But their data doesn't dispute the spread of IE languages? It just suggests a hybrid origin approach.
@@LearnHittite I guess we are going to have wait for the follow up papers to learn the implications of their findings: “Hybrid origins” seem to suggest some creolization occurred in IE languages. If that is the case this would have implications on PIE peoples as to whether they formed an ethnolinguistic unity. PIE “urheimat” would also become a questionable notion. De-emphasizing step origins for PIE languages could re-kindle some research activity on the possible other proto languages spoken in the steps as opposed to assuming that every ancient/prehistoric culture of note spoke a PIE language.
You sound like a sour grapes nationalist of either the Turkish or Out of India variety.
Really looking forward to the video about Illyrian. Great work!
Thanks!, Ive recorded it, just needs to be edited...which could take a while yet
@@LearnHittite Another ethnic group/language that dosen't seem to have come out of Corded Ware.
Very interesting review. Thanks for that. Statistical analysis is always tricky as a lot of it is counter intuitive.
It is, I agree and often open to misinterpretation.
@@LearnHittite the biggest problem that I have seen is that the experts in the field don't ask experts in statistics to do the analysis. This is not just a linguistics problem but seems to pervade most research sadly.
Would be a cool video to talk to a research statistition about how reliable this data is.
oh that's an excellent idea, I'll look into it, thank you!
If you know anyone who would be interesting in giving their thoughts on this, please let me know 👍
Wheel ( rad) Turkish top, round thing, gun, ball, top ( the toy)
Noun class marker.
Word, salad.
The sun disc and the moon disc is the answer to Starostin. Facilitate movement for the gods and the humans by many means. Look for Trundholm Sun Chariot. Mehrgarh wheel amulet or the wheel sign in indus valley. Aten sun disc. Helios being driven by chariots. And many more examples in many cultures. The polysemy is very abundant and you don't even need the word wheel or move for it, the answer or the semantics predates that.
I thought *kwel- was about turning around?
// Most early ceramic ware was hand-built using a simple coiling technique in which clay was rolled into long threads that were then pinched and smoothed together to form the body of a vessel. In the coiling method of construction, all the energy required to form the main part of a piece is supplied indirectly by the hands of the potter. Early ceramics built by coiling were often placed on mats or large leaves to allow them to be worked more conveniently. The evidence of this lies in mat or leaf impressions left in the clay of the base of the pot. This arrangement allowed the potter to rotate the vessel during construction, rather than walk around it to add coils of clay.
The oldest forms of the potter's wheel (called tourneys or slow wheels) were probably developed as an extension to this procedure. Tournettes, in use around 3500 BC in the Near East, were turned slowly by hand or by foot while coiling a pot. Only a small range of vessels were fashioned on the tournette, suggesting that it was used by a limited number of potters. //
It doesn't facilitate transport, but it does facilitate a particular type of production.
Regarding *Kwel- it depends on what source you're consulting, Pokorny had it as 'turning' I believe, PIE lexicon project has it as 'move'. Some IE languages have derived terms from *kwel seemingly more related to movement than turning. OI 'búachaill', herder, or lit. cow mover (I could be wrong though on that). Although the point made by Kassian was rather connected to the semantic shift from abstract to concrete that Heggarty was proposing.
The new German DNA and Linguistic results show PIE spread from Northern Mesopotamia Arc which is Kurdish populated region from antiquity till today. I would say it is better to do some redesign Kurdish and compare it with Hitites, Luwian and other languages where you will find fascinating results.
I'm thinking of doing a video on Kurdish language soon, could you recommend any good books regarding Kurdish grammar?
heggarty actually makes sense
What do you think of the names in the linguistic supplement to Damgaard et al. (Kroonen et al. 2018) §2.3 from Armi (location uncertain) in Ebla 25th c. BCE?
Alaluwadu, Aliluwada, Aliwada, Aliwadu, Aluwada, Aluwadu, Arzitála, Bamiadu, Bawiadu, Duduwašu, Haáštilu, Hudašu, Mimiadu, Muluwadu, Tar₅hili, and Ùlamadu.
They say they use the Anatolian endings -(w)anda/u, -(w)aššu, -tala, and -ili/u. I'm not sure whether the absence of the n in wanda/u is supposed to be phonetic or graphical.
The authors' conclusions are all over the place; I'm just more curious whether these names remind you of Hittite names that you have been reading.
Great question- those are Hittite name endings yes but I think the ultimate answer will depend on an analysis of those names in the armi Eblaite texts in regard to (proto) Hurrian, Hattic, Eblaite and other nearby/contemporary languages.
I'd need to look at the Eblaite cuneiform because you know, how signs are interpreted can make a big difference and I know zero about Eblaite 😅 but the absence of the 'n' needs investigation, in my opinion, because '-ata' and '-atu' are two Hurrian name endings. Hurrian does differentiate between voiced and unvoiced, but, as pointed out in the paper, Eblaite apparently doesn't always do so. 'ili-ilu' is also attested according to Sasson, 1974, in his list of Hurrian names from Mari, Syria. We know so little about Hattic that some Hittoid names might actually be misinterpreted Hattic ones (pointed out by Kloekhorst in 'Kanišite Hittite'). Not forgetting that the most likely explanation is that they are in fact semitic names. And just because those endings are attested in Hittoid personal names from the Old Assyrian period doesn't mean they are Anatolian in origin - Kanis was a melting pot of different speakers.
And unless I missed it, -aššu isn't mentioned in the Archi text they quoted. Maybe it was in the Bonechi text.
But I'm sure Kroonen and colleagues took all this into consideration, so I defer to their expertise. However, considering the significance of their conclusions, if true, I think we need a more thorough analysis through Semitic and Hurrian. Personally, I'm not knowledgeable enough on either to have a definitive opinion.
Aluwada does sound Luwian. I assume this was the list of names that Barjamovic and Kroonen claimed to have found in the tablets of Ebla, describing several individuals of a kingdom named Arma(?). Interesting though that in Kanišite Hittite, Kloekhorst was referencing about it but gave no further detail about it as the original claimers did not explain their findings.
I'll check the book again
Ah, thank you! Now that you mention it, the first six names remind me of that most popular name from over a thousand years later, Alyattes etc., said to have also been the possible origin of Goliath.
Wiktionary says that in Lydian it's walwetes, and walwe means lion and comes from PIE wlkwos "wolf." Neat!
@@danielbriggs991ah yes, Alyattes (or Alluwatta), the father of the Lydian king Croesus.
-anda/u came from Hattic, it means person and was loaned into Hittite. I don't see a connection with -ada
why there is a lot of uprift by european nationalists for the new homeland , heggarty et al is the best we have gotten till date
The data doesn't suggest a new homeland though, it suggests a hybrid model of two theories that have been around for a long time so I don't see your point?
@@LearnHittite Actually the paper does suggest a new homeland. That is the Fertile Crescent, and has PIE there at circa 8000 BP then a branch migrated to the Ukraine Steppe at circa 7000 BP, and into the rest of Europe at circa 5000 BP.
@@forest3064but at the time period you're stating, the fertile crescent is not a new suggestion at all.
@@forest3064😂 Heggarty and colleagues give a south of the Caucasus origin and that idea has been around formally since the eighties so there is nothing new in that regard
@@LearnHittite Yes, therefore the Steppe is not the homeland at all.