Post by Trog on Apr 9, 2018 7:45:24 GMT
Feb 11, 2018 10:21:54 GMT cjm said:
Some other major movements into Europe which are not extensively covered by Oppenheimer seem to be The Finns and the Hungarians and other members of the Uralic language group (which are Non-Indo-European). The following suggests the genetic flow (this is a relatively late-comer to Europe - after the last Ice Age (LGM)):.
.
.
I rely essentially on the following links
Languages of Europe
Ob-Ugric languages
Haplogroup N-M231
Proto-Uralic homeland hypotheses
Liao civilization
"People of Liao cilization possibly spoke Proto-Uralic language."
The following map shows the current distribution of the Uralic languages (Non-Indo-European, which I suspect share in the genetic flow indicated above)
.
.
Oppenheimer's book more or less stops at about 30,000 years ago, and despite various dubious pontifications is concerned exclusively with gene-flow.
I would not associate any language or language family with the movements he describes in "Out Of Africa" - e.g. I would be extremely sceptical of a claim that the people of the route designated as M17 on Page 137 spoke anything related or ancestral to Indo-European in any possible way.
The language families and isolates we identify today only developed about 20,000 years after Oppenheimer's book ends. And although there is no doubt that there are genetic markers associated with language groups, that is because these languages developed within geographic areas where a preponderance of such markers already existed.
20,000 years is a very, very long time. In a world made up of small groups of dispersed hunter-gatherers, with no internet, mobiles, postal services or means of writing things down. Linguists who work with these things do not entertain any notion of their proto-languages being older than about 5,000 years.