|
|
Welcome to
The Archive on All Empires
|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 6364656667 70> |
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search  Topic Options
|
||
Slayertplsko 
Chieftain 
Joined: 13-May-2008 Location: Slovakia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1064 |
 Post Options
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Is Germanic a subgroup of the Iranian languages?Posted: 12-Jan-2009 at 17:24 |
||
|
And now your sources for last three posts.
|
|||
|
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
|
|||
 |
|||
|
Northman
Administrator 
~ Scylding ~ Joined: 30-Aug-2004 Location: Denmark Online Status: Offline Posts: 4432 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Jan-2009 at 17:29 |
||
|
With the potential risk of being banned for trolling, let me summarize the virtual
content of the last 60 pages:
 It's Cyrus on the left...
 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cyrus Shahmiri
Tsar 
King of Kings Joined: 07-Aug-2004 Location: Iran Online Status: Offline Posts: 3963 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Jan-2009 at 19:20 |
||
Would you please tell me where it says Avestan had only five vowels?!!
|
|||
|
|||
|
Slayertplsko
Chieftain
Joined: 13-May-2008 Location: Slovakia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1064 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Jan-2009 at 20:16 |
||
|
It says about five vowels and schwa with short and long forms. I don't know how often schwa was used, for instance Slovak has it only very occasionally. In essence, Avestan vowels are very similar to Slovak vowels.
Edited by Slayertplsko - 12-Jan-2009 at 20:18 |
|||
|
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cyrus Shahmiri
Tsar
King of Kings Joined: 07-Aug-2004 Location: Iran Online Status: Offline Posts: 3963 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Jan-2009 at 18:01 |
||
I am on the left but my weapon is my source!
  |
|||
|
|||
|
Some
Pretorian 
Joined: 11-Nov-2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 168 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Jan-2009 at 18:32 |
||
Well your the one who denies all evidence against you and sources but you deny they exist. So I would reverse it is we with the sources and you who deny all evidence even when you have been allready deafeted in terms in linguistic and time frame and that is just part of it.
So let's be fair Cyrus.
But no no acording to you a Corded Ware IE dialect( would later be known as Germanic) that setteld in Scandiavia 4500 years is branch of a Yamna IE dialect known as Iranian that is in itself part of the large indo-iranian branch....
Other Corded Ware or battle axe dialects are Celtic, Italic, Illyrian, Balto-Slavic, and Tocharian thus Germanic is closer related to them Cyrus.
Yamna is Greek, Thracarian Phrygian Armenian, and Albanian etc.
 Edited by Some - 13-Jan-2009 at 18:39 |
|||
|
|||
|
Cyrus Shahmiri
Tsar
King of Kings Joined: 07-Aug-2004 Location: Iran Online Status: Offline Posts: 3963 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Jan-2009 at 19:20 |
||
|
You can never distinguish Germanic people from peoples who lived in the Germanic lands, there is absolutely no reason to say all Indo-European peoples who lived in the Germanic lands from 4500 years ago were just Germanic speaking-people, in fact there are several reasons which show Germanic peoples migrated to these regions in the later periods, we have compared numerous words in this thread, for example when we see the Proto-Germanic: *burg has an Hurro-Urartian and Caucasian origin and there is no cognate in the Centum languages, we have to believe that Germanic peoples could live somwhere around modern Armenia in the ancient times.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some
Pretorian
Joined: 11-Nov-2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 168 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Jan-2009 at 20:54 |
||
It says Proto-IE word bhurgh? might be loaned from Caucasian langauges(That we know PIE hade alot of contact with) or Hurro-Urartian.
It does not say that burg is a loan word from Cauasian.
I can show you some compairative method here.
Let's take some IE branches that came from Corded Ware horizon of course these are not absolutes and there are execptions but overall.
In indirict dative cases Slavic, Baltic, and Germanic uses m. Yamna Greek, Armenian and Indo-Iranian using -bhi.
Greek Armenian Indo-Iranian have athematic and a thematic aorist.
And this was just a few examples.
But if anything it seems like the first split was beetwen southen IE and Northen IE. Some linguists like Frederik Kortlandt have also talked about and observed this to some extent.
We can see that the early IE culture in Scandinavia did not move out from southern scandinavia and was not replaced with something else in later times. There culture have great similearties with the later Germanic cultures and showed great IE themes in general. In south scandinavia is the only place have any pre-germanic place names or in a longer shot pre IE place names pointing to an very old migreation to the aera but we know that there hasb een cultures in the aera before how ever it so long time ago that all the place names have changed there culture is very similear the nordic bronze age.
All love
|
|||
|
|||
|
Slayertplsko
Chieftain
Joined: 13-May-2008 Location: Slovakia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1064 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Jan-2009 at 22:03 |
||
Complete nonsense with lack of basic historical knowledge and common sense. You also forgot to verify your claims. Firstly, it is a very old loanword, entering PIE many centuries before any Germanic or Iranian languages emerged, at least in 3rd millennium, perhaps earlier. Secondly, there is no reason to think that words travel only by migrations - Slovak has quite many English words in it - where is your English migration to Carpathian basin? There is no. So you're wrong again, no common sense here. Thirdly, no one ever claimed those PIE speakers spoke Germanic language 4500 years ago, again, stop this nonsense, please. And last but not least, you're wrong with your claim that burg has no cognates in centum languages. So you're flat out wrong again, how long is this going to last?? Would you at least stop recycling refuted arguments?? Either provide a counterargument or don't use it again, that's fair, isn't it? |
|||
|
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
|
|||
|
|||
|
beorna
Colonel 
Joined: 03-Dec-2007 Location: Germany Online Status: Offline Posts: 552 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Jan-2009 at 23:19 |
||
We can't speak of a Germanic language before perhaps 600 BC. It is very difficult to say when the "Lautverschiebung" started. And it did not occur in the whole later Germanic area. It moved, probably from South to North. Before, let us take 600, there were just IE languages, no Germanic, Proto-Germanic or anything else, perhaps you could speak of an Pre-Germanic but even this wouldn't be helpful. The later Germans are a mixture of different cultures, with different stages of "Lautverschiebung". And as I said the earlist people that were called Germans were part of LaTene and are very difficult to devide from Gallic groups.
BTW I do not believe Tocharian is related closer to the Western centum languages than to the eastern satem languages. As I said here(?) before. For me it is obvious that the Tocharians did not share the younger stage of Satemisation as e.g the Indo-Iranian groups.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cyrus Shahmiri
Tsar
King of Kings Joined: 07-Aug-2004 Location: Iran Online Status: Offline Posts: 3963 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Jan-2009 at 05:29 |
||
|
Well said beorna, but what is your reason to dismiss the role of Iranian culture in the forming of the Germanic culture? Do you really believe that Scythians or other Iranian peoples could not be around there in 600 BC? Is it wrong that the Germanic sound shifts earlier occured in the Iranian languages? Don't you see some common principal words such as the words for God, King, County (Shire) and etc just in the Germanic and Iranian, not other IE languages?
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some
Pretorian
Joined: 11-Nov-2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 168 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Jan-2009 at 06:48 |
||
Stop running Cyrus this is what linguitics I gave you.
''
I can show you some compairative method here.
Let's take some IE branches that came from Corded Ware horizon of course these are not absolutes and there are execptions but overall.
In indirict dative cases Slavic, Baltic, and Germanic uses m. Yamna Greek, Armenian and Indo-Iranian using -bhi.
Greek Armenian Indo-Iranian have athematic and a thematic aorist.
And this was just a few examples. ''
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some
Pretorian
Joined: 11-Nov-2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 168 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Jan-2009 at 07:12 |
||
Hello Beorna thank you for your post. I do not say that those IE settlers spoke Proto-Germanic in fact Proto-Germanic is a late IE dialect with full evolved Grimms and Verners law and other various changes. They usaly call the diealect before Pre-Germanic or even futher pack a dialectual form of PIE that seem to have split from a northen diealect of PIE. The urheimat is southern scandinavia of the battle axe grave mound building culture.
''In one major[citation needed] theory of Andrev V Bell-Fialkov, Christopher Kaplonski, Wiliam B Mayer, Dean S Rugg, Rebeca W, Wendelken about Germanic origins, Indo-European speakers arrived on the plains of southern Sweden and Jutland, the center of the Urheimat or "original home" of the Germanic peoples, prior to the Nordic Bronze Age, which began about 4500 years ago. This is the only area where no pre-Germanic place names have been found.[3] The region was certainly populated before then; the lack of names must indicate an Indo-European settlement so ancient and dense that the previously assigned names were completely replaced. If archaeological horizons are at all indicative of shared language (not a straightforward assumption), the Indo-European speakers are to be identified with the much more widely ranged Cord-impressed ware or Battle-axe culture and possibly also with the preceding Funnel-necked beaker culture developing towards the end of the Neolithic culture of Western Europe.[4][5]
Proto-Germanic then evolved from the Indo-European spoken in the Urheimat region. The succession of archaeological horizons suggests that before their language differentiated into the individual Germanic branches the Proto-Germanic speakers lived in southern Scandinavia and along the coast from the Netherlands in the west to the Vistula in the east around 750 BC).'' And in linguistics of course it is very complicated and if you wish I could write in detail when I have time. But Proto-Germanic was just a late from of IE in Southern scandinavia. The problem is one can not see all the shifts happening in day accents shifts,consonant shifts,vowel shifts, seems to have taken time because if not then someone is talking about a fixed langauge and that is not the case.
''In historical linguistics, Proto-Germanic is a node in the tree model; that is, if the descent of languages can be compared to a biological family tree, Proto-Germanic appears as a point, or node, from which all the daughter languages branch, and is itself at the end of a branch leading from another node, Proto-Indo-European.[8] One of the problems with the node[6] is that it implies the existence of a fixed language in which all the laws defining it apply simultaneously. Proto-Germanic, however, must be regarded as a diachronic sequence of sound changes, each law or group of laws only becoming operant after previous changes.[9]
To the evolutionary history of a language family, a genetic "tree model" is considered appropriate only if communities do not remain in effective contact as their languages diverge. Early IE was computed to have featured limited contact between distinct lineages, while only the Germanic subfamily exhibited a less treelike behaviour as it acquired some characteristics from neighbours early in its evolution rather than from its direct ancestors. The internal diversification of especially West Germanic is cited to have been radically non-treelike.[10] W. P. Lehmann considered that Jacob Grimm's "First Germanic Sound Shift", or Grimm's Law and Verner's Law,[11] which pertained mainly to consonants and were considered for a good many decades to have generated Proto-Germanic, were pre-Proto-Germanic, and that the "upper boundary" was the fixing of the accent, or stress, on the root syllable of a word, typically the first.[12] Proto-Indo-European had featured a moveable pitch accent comprising "an alternation of high and low tones"[13] as well as stress of position determined by a set of rules based on the lengths of the word's syllables. The fixation of the stress led to sound changes in unstressed syllables. For Lehmann, the "lower boundary" was the dropping of final -a or -e in unstressed syllables; for example, PIE *woyd-á > Gothic wait, "knows" (the > and < signs in linguistics indicate a genetic descent). Antonsen agreed with Lehmann about the upper boundary[14] but later found runic evidence that the -a was not dropped: ékwakraz ... wraita, "I wakraz ... wrote (this)." He says: "We must therefore search for a new lower boundary for Proto-Germanic."[15] His own scheme divides Proto-Germanic into an early and a late. The early includes the stress fixation and resulting "spontaneous vowel-shifts" while to define the late he lists ten complex rules governing changes of both vowels and consonants'' Also we can see celtic loans that seems to have happend beofre grimms or Verners law ever tool place.
And ifo ne look at reflexes of earlier forms then we see that Germanic doesn ot fall into the same spehere as Iranian |
|||
|
|||
|
beorna
Colonel
Joined: 03-Dec-2007 Location: Germany Online Status: Offline Posts: 552 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Jan-2009 at 07:33 |
||
But you won't see any other evidence that show a closer relation to other IE languages.
|
|||
|
|||
|
beorna
Colonel
Joined: 03-Dec-2007 Location: Germany Online Status: Offline Posts: 552 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Jan-2009 at 07:51 |
||
the whole theme is very complicated. You're right that the "Urheimat" was once thought to be in South Sweden and Jutland. It is very difficult to say whether there was a continuity for milleniums from the corded ware people to the Skandinavians or not. There is also the problem how new languages occur. Do they originate far away from each other or is there a reason for a closer origin. I think the ethnogenesis of Celtic people is the reason why Germanic originated. Those groups were not allowed to share the new culture. They felt different and the language became more and more different. So the Germanic language evolved in the South and moved northwards. But this doesn't mean that Germanic groups moved northwards. We know that there was a migration from Skandinavia to the South. Those groups were linguistically Germanized then and probably their connections with their old homelands brought Germanic to the North. For such south-Northward relation we can use Przeworsk culture. It was thought that the Vandals came from Vendsyssel. I can't say they didn't but Przeworsk-culture originated in the south long before we have the first material in Jylland. Perhaps we have a first stage of linguistic differenciation in the Bronze Age, when the northern regions didn't completely participated in Urnfield culture and Hallstatt. Perhaps we have here a form of Proto-Germanic but I would like to stay away from the term "Germanic", I would prefer a "Late Norther IE" but at least they are just terms. Edited by beorna - 14-Jan-2009 at 08:41 |
|||
|
|||
|
Slayertplsko
Chieftain
Joined: 13-May-2008 Location: Slovakia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1064 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Jan-2009 at 08:07 |
||
Yes, it's completely wrong. We've discussed it. They had a few in common, though (just like they had with other branches). |
|||
|
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Slayertplsko
Chieftain
Joined: 13-May-2008 Location: Slovakia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1064 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Jan-2009 at 08:24 |
||
Again wrong. God has its cognates in Greek, Slavic, Indic, Iranian (and it's not ghoda). Shire comes from skizo, so it's unrelated to any Iranian word beginning with sh. And what does kuningaz have to do with Persian kian (spelling?)? Now I realised, didn't you claim that the persian word for god was ghoda?? Because I found only khodá. Edited by Slayertplsko - 14-Jan-2009 at 08:30 |
|||
|
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cyrus Shahmiri
Tsar
King of Kings Joined: 07-Aug-2004 Location: Iran Online Status: Offline Posts: 3963 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Jan-2009 at 10:27 |
||
|
Beorna, I know some Germanic words are closer to the words in the Centum languages, but those ones could be just some early loanwords from those languages, for example about the English word "Cold" (OE Cald), there are two words in the Avestan language, one of them is "Sard" (we just use this word in Persian), you can say it belongs to the Satem languages (k->s & l->r) but none of them could be Germanic but just another Avestan word which is "Haota" (aota) because we see in this word, similar to other Germanic and Iranian words, "k" has been changed to "x/h" and d->t.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Slayertplsko
Chieftain
Joined: 13-May-2008 Location: Slovakia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1064 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Jan-2009 at 10:31 |
||
|
Cyrus, this was already discussed and you were proved wrong. You won't be correct if you repeat it 100 times, so cease it, it's ridiculous. And would you please use some logics?? Your last post (if we consider it relevant) disproves you - the shift goes opposite direction as you would need, and even in such case, it needn't mean anything. Cyrus, please, common sense!
No wonder you claim you have provided evidence, when in fact, you have provided nothing. If you consider some flawed method like this to be evidence, even ignoring the fact that it disproves you, then it's obvious you could even believe it. Now seriously, is this just some kind of sick joke? Because this is getting very very very very illogical, no offence. Edited by Slayertplsko - 14-Jan-2009 at 10:36 |
|||
|
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cyrus Shahmiri
Tsar
King of Kings Joined: 07-Aug-2004 Location: Iran Online Status: Offline Posts: 3963 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Jan-2009 at 13:07 |
||
|
From my first post I said, there are two types of words in the Iranian languages, one group is similar to the words in the Satem langauges and another one, which is in the majority, is similar to the Germanic words (not Centum), I am just talking about Iranian languages and I hope you at least believe that I know them better than you. If you think I am wrong, please prove it!I have given numerous examples in this thread, lets see another one:
Ok, the Avestan word for "who" was "ko" but do you want to deny that the Avestan word hva or the Old Persian word hya also meant "who"?
|
|||
|
|||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 6364656667 70> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Is Germanic a subgroup of the Iranian languages?