>Yes, that's your scenario.
*Mine*? You gotta be kiddin'. :) Not mine (I don't have any
scenario of my own). It's by historians (of the relevant
countries), based on documents they've studied.
>But you are claiming that they switched away from Slavic to a
>German dialect
I didn't and don't do that. I merely said they didn't stop talking
Slavic. But what I tend to accept is the hypothesis that their
original Mamme Losch'n was some sort of Ogur (or even Onogur)
Turkic (and here and there some sort of Alanian), esp. in times
when they had to do to a lesser extent with Slavic populations.
>even if they were hundreds of miles away from where such a dialect >would be useful.
Not at all: look at the map of the German colonists expansion
(the military one only under the auspices and swords of the
Teutonic Order) after 1100-1200-1300. Take a look at the
spreading of German newcomers in Poland and Lithuania in those
centuries. Also take a look at the migration of Jewish waves
from the "Reich" in the 14th c., during the Plague time, when
German-speaking Jews had to take refuge in eastern countries
such as Poland and Hungary. Don't you think that German Jews
could have been good... teachers of language and Talmud to
their co-worshippers in the East?
Besides, you've already shown me you're aware of the notion
"die Ostbesiedelung".
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Ostsiedlung
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostsiedlung
>Wechsler does that because he has to, he is not aware of those
>Germanic dialects which were spoken in the relevant time and area.
How do you know he doesn't know? I assume he very well knows
the theses by his predecessors who showed (in the 20th c.)
the structures of Yiddish being south German and the assumptions
as to why has it evolved so and not, say as some Frisian-like or
Saxon-like or Münster-Platt-like German.
>So Proto-Romanian might have started here.
It might have started in a time period and conditions that very
probable were similar to those in which French, Provençal,
Catalan, Aragones, Italian, Rhaeto-Romanic etc. evolved. (If
you take old French, that has some of the oldest written
relics, then you remark the great phonetic similarity when
compared with esp. middle, southern Italian dialects and with
Romanian dialects. If you compare Italian dialects, esp.
phonetics, with Romanian, the similarities are striking,
although the chronologic gap is as long as it is in the case
of Angles, Saxons and Jutes in Britain when you compare them
with those Germans, Frisians and Danes that never migrated
to Britain. Phonetics differences between English and
German (or Low German) are bigger than phonetix diffs betw.
Romanian and Italian dialects, incl. Sicilianu, although
the Romance population that became "Vlach"/Romanian had no
linguistic links and exchanges with the Italian world after
the dramatic Avar-Slavic impact that severed all natural
ties (betw. approx. 604 and the 19th c.)
>>Look at the percentage tables yourself.
(Again you quote all paragraphs referring to the haplotype issue:
why? The text had been posted once - why repost the whole of it?)
>Your claim was:
>Ashkenazi Jews's origins are Scythian, Balto-Slavic, Turkic (Tatar)
>and Iranian.
Well, I forgot (but it is self-understood) the contribution of
the "cohanim" elements, i.e. of rabbies coming from Constantinople,
Baghdad, Spain and northern Africa. Those might have had more of
the "appropriate" haplotypes (as well as of M's & A's chromozome).
>From the article:
>'All relevant Y DNA studies have concluded that the majority
>of the paternal genetic heritage among Ashkenazim and other
>Jewish communities is similar to those found dominating
>Middle Eastern populations, and probably originated there.
Don't read only this conclusion and only that part of the
material provided by Wp. - read the whole stuff (divided into
several different articles). And keep in mind: the minimization
of the Near East lineage and the emphasizing of the Eurasian
(Yaphetic) lineage can't be done as overtly, for obvious synchronic
reasons.
>A smaller but still significant part of the Ashkenazi male line
>population is more likely to have originated from central and
>eastern European populations.'
But look at them with your eyes and not with the paragraphs by
half-religious fellas who believe 1:1 in ... legends: the looks
of the vast majority of the Ashkenasic population are Europid
looks (pinkish-white, blue-eyed, green-eyed, blond-haired, red-
haired, brown-haired), and those who are darker are rather of
the Caucasoid-Iranid Turkish kind, even having many members with
obvious mongolid looks. Compare them with the real semitic
populations, even with Jews from Yemen. Even the looks show you
a population that rather looks like those populations you find
in Turkey, in the Balkans, in Poland, the Baltic countries,
Russia, Ukraine, the Caucasian countries, and former Persian
and Khwarizmian countries (incl. Afghanistan) up to Uyguria
(Sinkiang).
Massive conversions to the Jewish faith were possible in a
certain period of time, after the 7th c., and later on never
again to such an extent (due to some dogmatic reasons). So,
later populations mixtures were to a much lesser extent.
(And don't forget those Caraite Jews from Eastern Europe who
still today speak their old Turkic dialects, esp. the one that
is related to the Crimea Cuman-or-Tatar Turkish. Which they
speak even in their communities in America.)
>The Scythian, Balto-Slavic, Turkic (Tatar) and Iranian peoples are
>not Middle Eastern populations.
Nor are the majority of the Ashkenasic population. I was referring
to the Ashkenasic population, and not to the Sephardic one. Of
course, there were small adstrata of immigrants, and a greater
adstratum from Spain after 1492, in times when many Sephardic Jews
emigrated chiefly to the Ottoman Empire provinces.
Anyway, this issue (whether the Ashkenasic population has a
considerable Semitic origin or an ... Ashkuza (Saka = Scythian)
origin) is off-topic within the "Schoeffe I" trade. It would
be on-topic if we had some hint/info showing that this population
might have been passed on to central Europe the notion shofet
in order to become zhupan and/or Saupe/Schuppe/Schöffe. But if
the Ashkenasic (or Sephardic or early medieval Rhineland Jewry)
had passed on this notion, then, anyway, the ethnic origins of the
Jewish population(s) (even if some of them might have been of
... Bastarnian extraction :-)) didn't and doesn't matter. What
matters (in this respect) is their religion (whose vocabulary
contains many Hebrew words).