Re: [tied] Re: Renfrew's theory renamed as Vasco-Caucasian

From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 50171
Date: 2007-09-30

Saami, supposedly has 25% pre-Uralic substrate and I
have no clue about any substrate in Finnish.
I've always wondered about shared substrate among
Germanic, Saami, Balto-Finnic and Baltic --but none of
you will get up off your duffs and figure it out for
me.
===============
A.F
If you read Ante Aikio's works,
you will notice that he rejects the word "autochtonous" and "substrate"
See
http://www.ling.helsinki.fi/sky/julkaisut/SKY2005/Aikio.pdf
 
page 10.
 
Also :
http://www.oulu.fi/nak22/absu2.html
 

Ante Aikio, University of Oulu, Giellagas Institute

The origin of Saami: a critical look at archaeological and linguistic evidence
The paper provides a critical review of the suggested connections between various archaeological cultures and the Saami language. In addition, recent results in comparative linguistics are summarized. It is shown that the loanword strata in the Saami languages are inconsistent with an assumption of a long Saami ethnic continuity in Lapland. The evidence suggests that the Proto-Saami language and Saami ethnic identity first emerged at a more southern latitude and spread to its present territory only in the early Iron Age. Consequently, any archaeological culture in Lapland prior to the Iron Age is best characterized as non-Saami.

 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: fournet.arnaud
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 6:22 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Renfrew's theory renamed as Vasco-Caucasian

 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Renfrew's theory renamed as Vasco-Caucasian

So when do you think the Saami began speaking Uralic

============ ==

A.F

What do you mean ?

Saami people are obviously Uralic, and never spoke anything but Uralic.

Saami is definitely conservative, in the Uralic family.

============ =======


and the Finns moved into Finland?

============ =====

A.F

They moved into Eastern Europe,

After Germanic split into Westic and Nordic,

and after Iranian split from Indic.

So it must be rather late,

A rough guess : after - 2 000 BC.

============ ========


Saami, supposedly has 25% pre-Uralic substrate and I
have no clue about any substrate in Finnish.
I've always wondered about shared substrate among
Germanic, Saami, Balto-Finnic and Baltic --but none of
you will get up off your duffs and figure it out for
me.

--- "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@ wanadoo.fr>
wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rick McCallister
> To: cybalist@... s.com
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 8:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Renfrew's theory renamed
> as Vasco-Caucasian
>
>
> Actually Scandinvia & W Baltic: Sweden, Denmark,
> Lower
> Saxony, Pomorze --Jastorf, right?
> Germanic began to split up sometime around 500 BC,
> right?
> And it spread out from there, right?
> In (continental) Scandinavia, the previous
> inhabitants
> spoke Uralic, namely Saami (and Finnish in
> Finland),
> right?
>
> ============ ========= =======
>
> A.F
>
> Germanic reached Scandinavia BEFORE (Western)
> Uralic.
>
> And I think Germanic split much earlier than 500
> BC,
>
> English and German were different languages as
> early as - 2500,
>
> if you recalibrate glottochronology erosion rate,
> to avoid having French and Italian split as late as
> in the XV century.
>
> (obviously absurd : Standard erosion rate is too
> fast
>
> It has to be slowed down and the result is that
> language splits are pushed into the past)
>
> ============ ========= =====
>
>
> And who knows what they spoke in Denmark and
> Pomorze,
> right?
> Maybe "Folkish"?, maybe "Apple language", who
> knows,
> right?
>
> --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@... com> wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@... s.com, Rick
> McCallister
> > <gabaroo6958@ ...> wrote:
> > >
> > > No one says that Scandinavia was the original
> > homeland
> > > of Germanic --just that it was centered there
> and
> > the
> > > NW Baltic
> >
> > Why 'centered' there? Where exactly is the 'NW
> > Baltic'?
> >
> > > c. 500 BCE.
> >
> > Why 500 BCE?
> >
> >
> > > Before that, well, probably present Saxony and
> > Poland.
> > > Regarding Uralic lexicon --look at Scandinavia
> and
> > the
> > > N. Baltic, who else besides Germanics live
> there?
> >
> > Is this 'N. Baltic' = your previous 'NW Baltic',
> and
> > if not, where is it?
> >
> >
> > Torsten
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
> Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel
> answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers -
> Check it out.
>
>
http://answers. yahoo.com/ dir/?link= list&sid= 396545469
>
>
>

____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
Got a little couch potato?
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
http://search. yahoo.com/ search?fr= oni_on_mail& p=summer+ activities+ for+kids& cs=bz