________________________________
From: tgpedersen <
tgpedersen@...>
To:
cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 1:09:28 PM
Subject: [tied] Re: from K. Julku, K. Wiik: The Roots and Peoples and Languages of Northern Europe
> >Y-chromosomes from somewhere else means invasion, and also that
> > FU in Europe must have a substrate, which is also a substrate for
> > Northern European IE. The best guess is Kuhn's ar-/ur- language
> > which I suspect is identical with Schrijver's language of
> > geminates.
>
> GK: Should we not assume distinct substrates (at least two):
> one for the area west of the maternal FU variants (unless even more
> distinctions may be discovered here) and another for the area
> of "certain FY variants"?
You mean 'FU variants', I assume.
****GK: Yes. Sorry for the typo.****
As I understand the authors, they think it might be possible, in spite
of the seeming homogeneity, to find local subgroupings (not FU, but
regional).
****GK: Yes. That's understood.****
Ie., hypothetically there might be some local structure in
the otherwise near-identical
****GK: So, apart from the discovered and analyzed (and thus hardly hypothetical) differences (and it is these differences which prompt the authors to use the term "preponderantly" in their Summary?) the mtDNA of FU and IE are the same exactly?****
mtDNA in FU and IE speakers. This is
hypothetical, and further, the thing you want it to mean is the
opposite of the conclusion they reached in their paper.
****GK: Do they say where this difference might come from? If purely regional is this an indication of an even deeper substrate here? Or... what?...****