http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/what-did-ancient-babylonian-songs-sound-like-something-like-this/
Some of the vocal flourishes strike me as modern, but this is still quite haunting and pretty. It's quite an attractive language. Seems to lack the laryngeal hideousness of Arabic.
:D
It's not clear if the song presented is Afro-Asiatic or not. If it's Sumerian it isn't, if it's Akkadian or Assyrian it is releated to Arabic. Still it probably doesn't sound like much like original language. Like someone in reading a Russian song without any understanding of Russian.
Quote from: Razgovory on December 14, 2014, 07:07:17 PM
It's not clear if the song presented is Afro-Asiatic or not. If it's Sumerian it isn't, if it's Akkadian or Assyrian it is releated to Arabic. Still it probably doesn't sound like much like original language. Like someone in reading a Russian song without any understanding of Russian.
Babylonian would presumably Akkadian, but Akkadian was very strongly influenced by the native Sumerian so I'm guessing it would sound quite a bit different from the quite conservative Afro-Asiatic languages of the deep desert.
There is quite a degree of ambiguity in the article. It says it uses both "Babylonian and Sumerian" but does not distinguish which is being used in the song or if they are distinguishing the languages at all. I question how much Akkadian "sounded" like Sumerian. Does Basque sound like French or Spanish? Does Hungarian sound like German? Finnish like Russian? Each is an example of two separate language families existing where one is conquered by the other.
Uh.
Finnish and Russian do kind of sound alike because of the extensive Uralic influence on Russian. If you look at Finnish or say Mordvin names, their phonology will look vaguely Russian a lot of the time. The Russian system of indication possession is largely lifted from the Uralic languages. And Spanish and Basque actually do sound somewhat alike. Basque land is right next to historic Castile. A lot of the early inhabitants of the County or Kingdom of Castile would have been Basque, and a lot of the early great kings are Basque. Ditto a lot of typically Spanish first and last names.
Hungarian is kind of an exception there, but then only kind of. It has some structural similarities with the Turkic languages of the inner Pannonian basin before the honfoglalás, and as previously stated Slavic and Uralic phonology have some similarities due to thousands of years of close contact. And I'd argue that the Uralic and Indo-European languages are genetically related but that's...not the argument.
Well, Spellus sucked any fun out of the subject.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 14, 2014, 07:46:50 PM
Well, Spellus sucked any fun out of the subject.
Once a thread is thoroughly Razzed, it's dead. At least Spellus makes it
sound like he knows something other than what he read on Wikipedia right before posting.
How much do we even know about Sumerian's genetic relationships?
Is this for real?
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on December 14, 2014, 10:27:06 PM
How much do we even know about Sumerian's genetic relationships?
Generally speaking nearby mountain populations are going to be a lot more conservative. Eastern Arab populations are going to reflect 1,400 years of the Arab slave trade and 3,000 years of migration of nomads from the deep desert, the steppe and Europe. They'd probably look like Caucasians. I think there's actually some evidence for this; Jews outside of the Beta Israel and Kaifeng populations (who have been, at least legally, endogamous for 2,500 years) are pretty closely grouped with Armenians and Turks. There's also some evidence that Sumerians migrated to their core area from the north IIRC.
Quote from: Siege on December 14, 2014, 10:41:52 PM
Is this for real?
Not really. They took the lyrics from some cuneiform, made an educated guess about the pronounciation, and made up the melody.
Broad is nice looking though.
IDK if that's accurate.
You can construct some basics of pronunciation of dead languages and "Babylonian" has a fairly close descendant in Assyrian.
Here's what a Sumerian might have looked like:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.guim.co.uk%2Fstatic%2Fw-620%2Fh--%2Fq-95%2Fsys-images%2FAdmin%2FBkFill%2FDefault_image_group%2F2011%2F5%2F21%2F1305986291984%2FTERRENCE-MALICK-TERRENCE--007.jpg&hash=6a89d66448e05afe781494ff440acd41425fdb82)
:wub:
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:05:58 PM
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on December 14, 2014, 10:27:06 PM
How much do we even know about Sumerian's genetic relationships?
Generally speaking nearby mountain populations are going to be a lot more conservative. Eastern Arab populations are going to reflect 1,400 years of the Arab slave trade and 3,000 years of migration of nomads from the deep desert, the steppe and Europe. They'd probably look like Caucasians. I think there's actually some evidence for this; Jews outside of the Beta Israel and Kaifeng populations (who have been, at least legally, endogamous for 2,500 years) are pretty closely grouped with Armenians and Turks. There's also some evidence that Sumerians migrated to their core area from the north IIRC.
Yeah, but they got shields on it and everything.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:12:55 PM
IDK if that's accurate.
You can construct some basics of pronunciation of dead languages and "Babylonian" has a fairly close descendant in Assyrian.
Here's what a Sumerian might have looked like:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.guim.co.uk%2Fstatic%2Fw-620%2Fh--%2Fq-95%2Fsys-images%2FAdmin%2FBkFill%2FDefault_image_group%2F2011%2F5%2F21%2F1305986291984%2FTERRENCE-MALICK-TERRENCE--007.jpg&hash=6a89d66448e05afe781494ff440acd41425fdb82)
:wub:
Get your own dad.
Seriously, it looks like my dad. :unsure:
That's Terrence Malick. :wub:
No wonder my dad likes Badlands so much.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 14, 2014, 11:16:30 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:12:55 PM
IDK if that's accurate.
TOTALLY INCORRECT
Kids are sane and will try to spell words how they are pronounced.
As a kid you had to learn that "knight" was spelled "knight" and not "niit".
We have records of kids learning languages, or people who are not fully brainwashed in to spelling things stupidly. From this it's not that difficult to map changes in pronunciation or practical matter of how a language was spoken.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:19:05 PM
Kids are sane and will try to spell words how they are pronounced.
As a kid you had to learn that "knight" was spelled "knight" and not "niit".
We have records of kids learning languages, or people who are not fully brainwashed in to spelling things stupidly. From this it's not that difficult to map changes in pronunciation or practical matter of how a language was spoken.
So when we see that a kid spelled ">>>^^" as ">>^^", we know what exactly about the pronounciation?
We can see change.
The thing I remember most is the Russian formation of "okanye"-basically, Russians stopped giving a fuck about almost every vowel in the language that wasn't stressed. So good, "khorosho", is pronounced "kharasho" not "KHOROSHO". People started making this mistake around the time of the Mongol conquest and indicates a big shift in the language. A lot of things like this have happened in English, I just don't know the rules as well.
Also foreigners don't give a shit about how the word they are borrowing is spelled.
Early Slavic boat is "karabl", from the early Byzantine Greek "karabel." This means that the Slavs were interacting with Greek speakers who had ships prior to the time the Greeks lost the "b" phoneme and merged it with "v" (Russian "Vasilij" is the Greek name "Basil" because it was introduced later.)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FGD6qtc2_AQA%2Fmaxresdefault.jpg&hash=8cfa5528aeae66a863710c8b57b28e745773428d)
The coolest cognate that I encountered this week was Angra Mainyu = 'angry man.' :)
Quote from: grumbler on December 14, 2014, 10:03:28 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 14, 2014, 07:46:50 PM
Well, Spellus sucked any fun out of the subject.
Once a thread is thoroughly Razzed, it's dead. At least Spellus makes it sound like he knows something other than what he read on Wikipedia right before posting.
Say what you will, you never admit a strategy has failed. You have tried to get everyone on this board to ignore me for what? 4 years now? Hasn't worked. We don't even have an ignore function anymore, and you still try. I have a feeling I will be long dead and buried and you'll still be trying to convince people to ignore me. At least then you'll have some success.
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on December 14, 2014, 10:27:06 PM
How much do we even know about Sumerian's genetic relationships?
It has none. It's a language isolate. This is sort of like a person who speaks Japanese trying to sing authentic Etruscan by studying church Latin.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:32:18 PM
Also foreigners don't give a shit about how the word they are borrowing is spelled.
Early Slavic boat is "karabl", from the early Byzantine Greek "karabel." This means that the Slavs were interacting with Greek speakers who had ships prior to the time the Greeks lost the "b" phoneme and merged it with "v" (Russian "Vasilij" is the Greek name "Basil" because it was introduced later.)
Is that related to the English word "caravel"?
Quote from: Razgovory on December 15, 2014, 12:23:42 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:32:18 PM
Also foreigners don't give a shit about how the word they are borrowing is spelled.
Early Slavic boat is "karabl", from the early Byzantine Greek "karabel." This means that the Slavs were interacting with Greek speakers who had ships prior to the time the Greeks lost the "b" phoneme and merged it with "v" (Russian "Vasilij" is the Greek name "Basil" because it was introduced later.)
Is that related to the English word "caravel"?
Obviously. Guessing through the Sicilians or Venetians with Spain as an intermediary, but that's a guess.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:19:05 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 14, 2014, 11:16:30 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:12:55 PM
IDK if that's accurate.
TOTALLY INCORRECT
Kids are sane and will try to spell words how they are pronounced.
As a kid you had to learn that "knight" was spelled "knight" and not "niit".
We have records of kids learning languages, or people who are not fully brainwashed in to spelling things stupidly. From this it's not that difficult to map changes in pronunciation or practical matter of how a language was spoken.
Only this is a great example of the opposite - because outside of English, no other kid in any other language would spell "knight" as "niit". In most continental European languages "niit" would be phonetically pronounced as "neet". Which proves you cannot deduct pronunciation from phonetic spelling unless you already know the pronunciation of the language in which the word was spelled phonetically - which kinda defeats the purpose.
Phonetically knight would probably be spelled nite.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:12:55 PM
IDK if that's accurate.
You can construct some basics of pronunciation of dead languages and "Babylonian" has a fairly close descendant in Assyrian.
Here's what a Sumerian might have looked like:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.guim.co.uk%2Fstatic%2Fw-620%2Fh--%2Fq-95%2Fsys-images%2FAdmin%2FBkFill%2FDefault_image_group%2F2011%2F5%2F21%2F1305986291984%2FTERRENCE-MALICK-TERRENCE--007.jpg&hash=6a89d66448e05afe781494ff440acd41425fdb82)
:wub:
Terrence Malick :wub:
Can't wait for that musical he's shooting.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 15, 2014, 01:29:27 AM
Phonetically knight would probably be spelled nite.
Again, phonetically according to the rules of what language? Certainly not Latin, German or Polish.
Phonetic spelling means you are spelling a word in a manner that, if each letter (or, more specifically, phonem) was read independently of each other, they would give the correct pronounciation of the word in the end.
That does not change the fact that, say, the letter "w" or "j" is pronounced completely differently in English, Polish, Spanish or German (and does not even exist in Latin). So the point is, you cannot deduct pronounciation from phonetic spelling if you do not know what language was used to spell phonetically in the first place.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 15, 2014, 12:40:03 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 15, 2014, 12:23:42 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:32:18 PM
Also foreigners don't give a shit about how the word they are borrowing is spelled.
Early Slavic boat is "karabl", from the early Byzantine Greek "karabel." This means that the Slavs were interacting with Greek speakers who had ships prior to the time the Greeks lost the "b" phoneme and merged it with "v" (Russian "Vasilij" is the Greek name "Basil" because it was introduced later.)
Is that related to the English word "caravel"?
Obviously. Guessing through the Sicilians or Venetians with Spain as an intermediary, but that's a guess.
To my knowledge, that is true. "Carabela" is a type of small boat in Spanish (the one Columbus used in his first voyage), at the very least.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 15, 2014, 01:29:27 AM
Phonetically knight would probably be spelled niite.
No, it would be /naɪt/
Please use phonetically only with API transcriptions, thank you.
I bet you could look through 300 other fora and never find this level of geekiness. Ever. Kudos to Psellus for pushing the stakes higher.
:lol:
Quote from: Norgy on December 15, 2014, 05:31:59 AM
I bet you could look through 300 other fora and never find this level of geekiness. Ever. Kudos to Psellus for pushing the stakes higher.
:lol:
Well, somethingawful.com had recently a fanfic about Jaime Lannister being gang-raped by Winnie the Pooh, the Piglet and the Tiger...
I just got an erection
Quote from: Ideologue on December 14, 2014, 11:15:18 PM
Seriously, it looks like my dad. :unsure:
My dad looks like John Bolton. :Embarrass:
Quote from: Caliga on December 15, 2014, 07:37:34 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 14, 2014, 11:15:18 PM
Seriously, it looks like my dad. :unsure:
My dad looks like John Bolton. :Embarrass:
I guess it's better than Roose Bolton... :hmm:
I have no idea who that is. :huh:
Quote from: Caliga on December 15, 2014, 07:45:40 AM
I have no idea who that is. :huh:
Character in Game of Thrones.
Quote from: Caliga on December 15, 2014, 07:45:40 AM
I have no idea who that is. :huh:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages6.fanpop.com%2Fimage%2Fphotos%2F34600000%2Fgot-game-of-thrones-34627383-500-300.gif&hash=3c1a4b4a74e82c5fcbd1b24c5aa7b2c19194f9d9)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia-cache-ak0.pinimg.com%2F236x%2F33%2F18%2Fcf%2F3318cf0bde067443970e9b67c920b2f4.jpg&hash=f3323d87e696c8470e3d5eec8cdf03760b63f52f)
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 07:40:39 PMAnd Spanish and Basque actually do sound somewhat alike. Basque land is right next to historic Castile. A lot of the early inhabitants of the County or Kingdom of Castile would have been Basque, and a lot of the early great kings are Basque. Ditto a lot of typically Spanish first and last names.
Say what? Basque and Spanish are nothing alike, and in no conceivable way do they sound alike. Basque sounds like fucking Klingon.
Also, while there was undoubtly some Basque-Castillian mixing early on I don't think that Basque influence was as great as you describe it, and you might be making the relatively common mistake of foreigners to associate the Kingdom of Navarre with Basqueness, which it was not.
Quote
Say what? Basque and Spanish are nothing alike, and in no conceivable way do they sound alike. Basque sounds like fucking Klingon.
Also, while there was undoubtly some Basque-Castillian mixing early on I don't think that Basque influence was as great as you describe it, and you might be making the relatively common mistake of foreigners to associate the Kingdom of Navarre with Basqueness, which it was not.
You grew up knowing one language and being familiar with the other. I've heard quite a bit of Basque, and I think the sound inventory sounds vaguely similar to Spanish. The structure very clearly isn't though, which is what you might be hearing. The vowel system is basically the same.
And I don't really think so. Navarre was ethnically mixed, but I think its ethnic core was Basque. IIRC Castile was settled partially by people from Asturias, and presumably some of the reconquered area would have had some remaining Mozarabic Romance-speaking population.
QuoteTo my knowledge, that is true. "Carabela" is a type of small boat in Spanish (the one Columbus used in his first voyage), at the very least.
Huh. Isn't it "caravel" in Spanish?
Quote1520s, from Middle French caravelle (15c.), from Spanish carabela or Portuguese caravela, diminutive of caravo "small vessel," from Late Latin carabus "small wicker boat covered with leather," from Greek karabos, literally "beetle, lobster" (see scarab). Earlier form carvel (early 15c.) survives in carvel-built (adj.).
Hmm. This was not what my Phonetics professor told me, but this was back in 2008 and my memory might not be completely accurate.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 15, 2014, 11:31:30 AM
Quote
Say what? Basque and Spanish are nothing alike, and in no conceivable way do they sound alike. Basque sounds like fucking Klingon.
Also, while there was undoubtly some Basque-Castillian mixing early on I don't think that Basque influence was as great as you describe it, and you might be making the relatively common mistake of foreigners to associate the Kingdom of Navarre with Basqueness, which it was not.
You grew up knowing one language and being familiar with the other. I've heard quite a bit of Basque, and I think the sound inventory sounds vaguely similar to Spanish. The structure very clearly isn't though, which is what you might be hearing. The vowel system is basically the same.
And I don't really think so. Navarre was ethnically mixed, but I think its ethnic core was Basque. IIRC Castile was settled partially by people from Asturias, and presumably some of the reconquered area would have had some remaining Mozarabic Romance-speaking population.
If you say to somebody from Navarre that their ethnic core is Basque there is a not insignificant chance that you'll end up lynched.
Quote from: The Larch on December 15, 2014, 01:18:07 PM
If you say to somebody from Navarre that their ethnic core is Basque there is a not insignificant chance that you'll end up lynched.
:lol:
"Wanna see my ethnic core, baby?" :perv:
Quote from: grumbler on December 15, 2014, 08:02:56 AM
Quote from: Caliga on December 15, 2014, 07:45:40 AM
I have no idea who that is. :huh:
Character in Game of Thrones.
That would explain why I don't know who it is then. :)
Quote from: Jacob on December 15, 2014, 01:25:51 PM
Quote from: The Larch on December 15, 2014, 01:18:07 PM
If you say to somebody from Navarre that their ethnic core is Basque there is a not insignificant chance that you'll end up lynched.
:lol:
"Wanna see my ethnic core, baby?" :perv:
:lol:
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 07:13:28 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 14, 2014, 07:07:17 PM
It's not clear if the song presented is Afro-Asiatic or not. If it's Sumerian it isn't, if it's Akkadian or Assyrian it is releated to Arabic. Still it probably doesn't sound like much like original language. Like someone in reading a Russian song without any understanding of Russian.
Babylonian would presumably Akkadian, but Akkadian was very strongly influenced by the native Sumerian so I'm guessing it would sound quite a bit different from the quite conservative Afro-Asiatic languages of the deep desert.
Interesting theory but the link says this song was in Hurrian.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:05:58 PM
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on December 14, 2014, 10:27:06 PM
How much do we even know about Sumerian's genetic relationships?
Generally speaking nearby mountain populations are going to be a lot more conservative. Eastern Arab populations are going to reflect 1,400 years of the Arab slave trade and 3,000 years of migration of nomads from the deep desert, the steppe and Europe. They'd probably look like Caucasians. I think there's actually some evidence for this; Jews outside of the Beta Israel and Kaifeng populations (who have been, at least legally, endogamous for 2,500 years) are pretty closely grouped with Armenians and Turks. There's also some evidence that Sumerians migrated to their core area from the north IIRC.
I'm confused here - is the question what the Sumerians might have looked like? Because then the subsequent activities of nomads and slave traders would not be relevant. (?)
Also - what is the evidence of Sumerian migration? I had always understood Sumerian origins to be unknown.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 15, 2014, 02:19:30 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 07:13:28 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 14, 2014, 07:07:17 PM
It's not clear if the song presented is Afro-Asiatic or not. If it's Sumerian it isn't, if it's Akkadian or Assyrian it is releated to Arabic. Still it probably doesn't sound like much like original language. Like someone in reading a Russian song without any understanding of Russian.
Babylonian would presumably Akkadian, but Akkadian was very strongly influenced by the native Sumerian so I'm guessing it would sound quite a bit different from the quite conservative Afro-Asiatic languages of the deep desert.
Interesting theory but the link says this song was in Hurrian.
I thought the link just said she was assisted by someone whose "notable blurb" is that they had composed music for that Hurrian hymn.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:12:55 PM
IDK if that's accurate.
Are the elbows too pointy for you?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 15, 2014, 02:19:30 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 07:13:28 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 14, 2014, 07:07:17 PM
It's not clear if the song presented is Afro-Asiatic or not. If it's Sumerian it isn't, if it's Akkadian or Assyrian it is releated to Arabic. Still it probably doesn't sound like much like original language. Like someone in reading a Russian song without any understanding of Russian.
Babylonian would presumably Akkadian, but Akkadian was very strongly influenced by the native Sumerian so I'm guessing it would sound quite a bit different from the quite conservative Afro-Asiatic languages of the deep desert.
Interesting theory but the link says this song was in Hurrian.
The article says she was guided by the work of another music scholar who'd come up with a score for a Hurrian song*, the "Hymn to Nikkal"; the music in the link is an adaptation of another piece, "The Flood", presumably from an Akkadian version of the legend (although the article is unclear on this.)
*More accurately, judging by the link provided, came up with an interpretation of the known ancient score. So if she interpreted it incorrectly then the "influence" is incorrect as well.
Ah I see it is all very unclear in the article. The Babylonians used both Sumerian and Akkadian while at the same time speaking another language, so without further specification I don't know what to think.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 15, 2014, 02:22:16 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:05:58 PM
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on December 14, 2014, 10:27:06 PM
How much do we even know about Sumerian's genetic relationships?
Generally speaking nearby mountain populations are going to be a lot more conservative. Eastern Arab populations are going to reflect 1,400 years of the Arab slave trade and 3,000 years of migration of nomads from the deep desert, the steppe and Europe. They'd probably look like Caucasians. I think there's actually some evidence for this; Jews outside of the Beta Israel and Kaifeng populations (who have been, at least legally, endogamous for 2,500 years) are pretty closely grouped with Armenians and Turks. There's also some evidence that Sumerians migrated to their core area from the north IIRC.
I'm confused here - is the question what the Sumerians might have looked like? Because then the subsequent activities of nomads and slave traders would not be relevant. (?)
Also - what is the evidence of Sumerian migration? I had always understood Sumerian origins to be unknown.
I'm saying that they might have looked more like, say, Mandeans or Assyrians than a lot of Muslim Mashriq Arab populations. As to origin of the Sumerians-I think a lot of the first relatively complex cultures of the ME are a bit further north. The Halaf Culture, for instance. Gobekli and whatnot are in contemporary Turkey. I guess it's up for debate if the development of Sumer reflected migration or adoption and expansion of the "agricultural package" (domestication, pottery, beginnings of urban life.)
Their language isn't related to that of any of the likely exodus points and of course there is really no affirmative evidence of migration (that I know of).
In the lack of better evidence I would assume they were aboriginal.
Problem there is that there's no possible source of linguistic evidence.
I've heard some really vague reference to there being some proof of a substrate in Sumerian. I also don't know if there's evidence that the Hurrians are native-there's some vague reference to their connection with modern North East Caucasians which could point either way.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 15, 2014, 05:38:48 PM
In the lack of better evidence I would assume they were aboriginal.
With the exception of some often more modern incidents (migration to the new world post columbus a major example), in the cases that DNA and skeletal tests have been done, isn't it usually the case that people in a region from the historical period more or less looked like the same people living there today?
My default assumption would be the ancient sumerians basically looked the same as the people living in the region now. I also think it is unlikely they came from somewhere else considering there wasn't a migration in the historical record and there was considerable cultural continuity going back into the prehistoric period.
Archaeologically speaking there is considerable cultural continuity going back thousands of years., at least that's my understanding.
Quote from: alfred russel on December 15, 2014, 05:59:03 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 15, 2014, 05:38:48 PM
In the lack of better evidence I would assume they were aboriginal.
With the exception of some often more modern incidents (migration to the new world post columbus a major example), in the cases that DNA and skeletal tests have been done, isn't it usually the case that people in a region from the historical period more or less looked like the same people living there today?
My default assumption would be the ancient sumerians basically looked the same as the people living in the region now. I also think it is unlikely they came from somewhere else considering there wasn't a migration in the historical record and there was considerable cultural continuity going back into the prehistoric period.
TBH, I think people of the far future would make that assumption about New Yorkers today vs. New Yorkers 900 years ago.
Classical authors talk about Thracians and Dacians being pale and red-haired, but those traits are really uncommon among modern Bulgarians and Romanians. Ditto red hair for the Uyghurs and Kazakhs.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 15, 2014, 06:10:44 PM
TBH, I think people of the far future would make that assumption about New Yorkers today vs. New Yorkers 900 years ago.
There are exceptions, and the one exception I explicitly stated is the one you bring up. :P
QuoteClassical authors talk about Thracians and Dacians being pale and red-haired, but those traits are really uncommon among modern Bulgarians and Romanians. Ditto red hair for the Uyghurs and Kazakhs.
I realize I'm quoting wikipedia, but from the article on Thracians:
QuoteSeveral Thracian graves or tombstones have the name Rufus inscribed on them, meaning "redhead" – a common name given to people with red hair.[41] Ancient Greek artwork often depicts Thracians as redheads.[42] Rhesus of Thrace, a mythological Thracian King, derived his name because of his red hair and is depicted on Greek pottery as having red hair and beard.[42] Ancient Greek writers also described the Thracians as red haired. A fragment by the Greek poet Xenophanes describes the Thracians as blue-eyed and red haired:
...Men make gods in their own image; those of the Ethiopians are black and snub-nosed, those of the Thracians have blue eyes and red hair.[43]
Bacchylides described Theseus as wearing a hat with red hair, which classicists believe was Thracian in origin.[44] Other ancient writers who described the hair of the Thracians as red include Hecataeus of Miletus,[45] Galen,[46] Clement of Alexandria,[47] and Julius Firmicus Maternus.[48]
Nevertheless, academic studies have concluded that Thracians had physical characteristics typical of European Mediterraneans. According to Dr. Beth Cohen, Thracians had "the same dark hair and the same facial features as the Ancient Greeks."[49] Recent genetic analysis comparing DNA samples of ancient Thracian fossil material from southeastern Romania with individuals from modern ethnicities place Italian, Albanian and Greek individuals in closer genetic kinship with the Thracians than Romanian and Bulgarian individuals.[50] On the other hand, Dr. Aris N. Poulianos states that Thracians, like modern Bulgarians, belong mainly to the Aegean anthropological type.[51]
That seems fair, but the point on the Tocharians and the steppe in general still stands.
This attractive woman was native to the Tarim Basin, modern day Xinjiang province in western China.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthelivingmoon.com%2F43ancients%2F04images%2FTarim_Mummies%2Floubeaut2.jpg&hash=891c258a61f4407995a60fe6d42d1bd225a124a6)
The issue was that after the Indo-European groups reached kind of a natural limit of their expansion in the forests and mountains of modern Western Mongolia, certain groups were materially and culturally integrated and influenced by Indo-European peoples, and probably genetically influenced as well, but they weren't completely integrated. Eventually, the great steppe pump got going as people from the arid and frozen steppe continuously displaced people from the western steppe. We have records of this going back to the Cimmerians. So every generation would look more "eastern" than the next, meaning that while in the Middle Ages people described Turkic populations ancestral to the modern Tatars and Kazakhs as "blondes" or "pale people", that's just not how we think of most of these populations today.
I suspect something true has happened both in the Levant and in North Africa. When urban and agricultural populations are weak, nomads have the advantage and move in, and this happens continuously.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 15, 2014, 06:34:47 PM
The issue was that after the Indo-European groups reached kind of a natural limit of their expansion in the forests and mountains of modern Western Mongolia, certain groups were materially and culturally integrated and influenced by Indo-European peoples, and probably genetically influenced as well, but they weren't completely integrated. Eventually, the great steppe pump got going as people from the arid and frozen steppe continuously displaced people from the western steppe. We have records of this going back to the Cimmerians. So every generation would look more "eastern" than the next, meaning that while in the Middle Ages people described Turkic populations ancestral to the modern Tatars and Kazakhs as "blondes" or "pale people", that's just not how we think of most of these populations today.
I suspect something true has happened both in the Levant and in North Africa. When urban and agricultural populations are weak, nomads have the advantage and move in, and this happens continuously.
So basically the regions under discussion looked roughly as they do now prior to the indo european expansion, then with the Indo European expansion the white people moved in displacing the indigineous looking people who became nomads, and through the centuries the nomads bred with the indo european elite (which in this case would include sumerians?) eventually producing the current looking populations?
I don't know....
Aside from sumerian language not being indo european, the archeological evidence suggests they were indigineous.
Quote from: The Larch on December 15, 2014, 01:18:07 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on December 15, 2014, 11:31:30 AM
Quote
Say what? Basque and Spanish are nothing alike, and in no conceivable way do they sound alike. Basque sounds like fucking Klingon.
Also, while there was undoubtly some Basque-Castillian mixing early on I don't think that Basque influence was as great as you describe it, and you might be making the relatively common mistake of foreigners to associate the Kingdom of Navarre with Basqueness, which it was not.
You grew up knowing one language and being familiar with the other. I've heard quite a bit of Basque, and I think the sound inventory sounds vaguely similar to Spanish. The structure very clearly isn't though, which is what you might be hearing. The vowel system is basically the same.
And I don't really think so. Navarre was ethnically mixed, but I think its ethnic core was Basque. IIRC Castile was settled partially by people from Asturias, and presumably some of the reconquered area would have had some remaining Mozarabic Romance-speaking population.
If you say to somebody from Navarre that their ethnic core is Basque there is a not insignificant chance that you'll end up lynched.
Euros, everybody. They still care about what kind of Caucasian they are. :(
Quote from: Psellusgreat steppe pump
If you ever write a book, you already have your title.
Quote from: alfred russel on December 15, 2014, 06:50:15 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on December 15, 2014, 06:34:47 PM
The issue was that after the Indo-European groups reached kind of a natural limit of their expansion in the forests and mountains of modern Western Mongolia, certain groups were materially and culturally integrated and influenced by Indo-European peoples, and probably genetically influenced as well, but they weren't completely integrated. Eventually, the great steppe pump got going as people from the arid and frozen steppe continuously displaced people from the western steppe. We have records of this going back to the Cimmerians. So every generation would look more "eastern" than the next, meaning that while in the Middle Ages people described Turkic populations ancestral to the modern Tatars and Kazakhs as "blondes" or "pale people", that's just not how we think of most of these populations today.
I suspect something true has happened both in the Levant and in North Africa. When urban and agricultural populations are weak, nomads have the advantage and move in, and this happens continuously.
So basically the regions under discussion looked roughly as they do now prior to the indo european expansion, then with the Indo European expansion the white people moved in displacing the indigineous looking people who became nomads, and through the centuries the nomads bred with the indo european elite (which in this case would include sumerians?) eventually producing the current looking populations?
I don't know....
Oh.
We're talking about the fertile crescent, so the nomads in question would come from both the Steppe AND the deep desert. Amorites, for instance.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 15, 2014, 06:56:49 PM
Quote from: Psellusgreat steppe pump
If you ever write a book, you already have your title.
Is that a joke?
That's exactly what it was, though.
I think it should be kept in mind that concepts like color and ethnicity often differ quite a bit from culture to culture and time period to time period. For classical Greeks, what they called "Thracians" may not line up exactly with what what we call "Thracians", and their description of "red" may be somewhat different then what we would call it. Greeks might see some Celtic slaves with light brown hair being marched through town, and describe them as "red headed Thracians".
Take for instance the English phrase "Grey eminence" which comes from a French to describe Richelieu's assistant Father Joseph a powerful monk. The "grey", was used to describe his clothing, however the color he wore would not be described as "Grey" today. It would be described as a light brown or maybe buff.
I'm sure Richelieu kept in shape, but buff?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 15, 2014, 02:22:16 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:05:58 PM
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on December 14, 2014, 10:27:06 PM
How much do we even know about Sumerian's genetic relationships?
Generally speaking nearby mountain populations are going to be a lot more conservative. Eastern Arab populations are going to reflect 1,400 years of the Arab slave trade and 3,000 years of migration of nomads from the deep desert, the steppe and Europe. They'd probably look like Caucasians. I think there's actually some evidence for this; Jews outside of the Beta Israel and Kaifeng populations (who have been, at least legally, endogamous for 2,500 years) are pretty closely grouped with Armenians and Turks. There's also some evidence that Sumerians migrated to their core area from the north IIRC.
I'm confused here - is the question what the Sumerians might have looked like? Because then the subsequent activities of nomads and slave traders would not be relevant. (?)
Also - what is the evidence of Sumerian migration? I had always understood Sumerian origins to be unknown.
The question was about Sumerian's genetic relationships, not Sumerians' genetic relationships.
Great steppe pump vs. Incan torpedo boats? The History Channel should do an episode on that.
Where did the Incan Torpedo Boat thing originated from?
Something stupid that Crunch was on about back in 2002.
Quote from: Martinus on December 16, 2014, 03:38:39 AM
Great steppe pump vs. Incan torpedo boats? The History Channel should do an episode on that.
They are busy doing a show on Revelations.
Quote from: Razgovory on December 17, 2014, 12:37:53 AM
Something stupid that Crunch was on about back in 2002.
I miss that dude. :(
Quote from: Siege on December 17, 2014, 12:33:52 AM
Where did the Incan Torpedo Boat thing originated from?
Somebody made 'Incan Torpedo Boat' up to mock him, but IIRC he may have started a Timmayesque "What if...?" thread about what if the Incan navy was technologically advanced when they made contact with Spain, or something like that.
There is possible evidence of Inca naval expeditions as far as Easter Island, but sadly no torpedo boats. :(
Quote from: Queequeg on December 14, 2014, 11:24:21 PMA lot of things like this have happened in English, I just don't know the rules as well.
:o The Great Vowel Shift!? :o
QuotePhonetically knight would probably be spelled nite.
Now. Middle English is broadly phonetic. It was pronounced knight.
Canigut?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 21, 2014, 09:41:19 AM
Canigut?
Similar to German knecht. Kn, not 'kan', short i, gh would be breathy.
Knecht meaning servant/minion/vassal etc. German Ritter OTOH emphasizes the riding part instead.
I didn't know German developed another word. But yeah the Old English cniht (or cneoht) had the same meaning of young man, servant, attendant and soldier.
Speaking of Old English I'm really looking forward to reading this after Christmas:
QuoteThe Wake by Paul Kingsnorth review – 'A literary triumph'
Paul Kingsnorth borrows from Od English with compelling results in this medieval tale of guerrilla warfare in the Lincolnshire fens
Adam Thorpe
Wednesday 2 April 2014 16.01 BST
Refusing to use the past as mere picturesque setting, the best historical fiction doesn't so much give us a glimpse into that foreign country as let us look out from it. Language is the key. In my novel Ulverton, set in a village over 300 years, I used strict imitations of period language to find my way into the folds of each century, while Hodd, set in the 13th century, purported to be a translation of a Latin manuscript. For The Wake, a novel set in 11th-century Lincolnshire during and after the Norman invasion, Paul Kingsnorth has adopted another solution: he writes in what he calls "a shadow tongue", a language "intended to convey the feeling" of Old English through borrowed vocabulary and syntax – much as Russell Hoban did with modern English to conjure a devastated future in his post-apocalyptic Riddley Walker.
As The Wake's first-person narrator revisits the trauma of an invasion by "ingenga" (foreigners) that changed our islands for ever (and mostly for the worse), we leave history on the desk and wade through muddy experience by dint of our exercised imaginations. Hastings might have gone the other way, but it didn't, and for three centuries the elite talked another language. Kingsnorth is a green activist, author of an attack on corporate control and blandness called Real England, and his first novel has a fierceness about it that gives it real heft.
Apart from a subdued sense that the novel intends a modern parallel with our own dispossessed times, the narrative keeps us firmly within its very particular universe: we are linguistically belted in for the entire ride. The small effort it demands of the reader triggers a greater engagement, and the effort lessens as the pages turn. More importantly, Kingsnorth has a sensitivity that lifts what might have been a clever exercise into a literary triumph. "Loc it is well cnawan there is those wolde be tellan lies and those with only them selfs in mynd," runs an early sentence. Lies and truth, self-belief and self-delusion, these are the key themes as the narrator, "buccmaster of holland" – a proudly independent free-tenant farmer in the Lincolnshire fens, given to wife-beating and foul-mouthed fits of rage – turns to guerrilla warfare after the "frenc" occupiers destroy his farm and family.
Part of the appeal of the story lies in its revelation of a profoundly damaged man. Influenced by his grandfather and an inherited rune-scribbled sword, Buccmaster is a worshipper of the old pagan gods who talks to trees and hates the priests and their hypocrisy – a proto-Robin Hood furious at being treated like "fuccan swine in our own land".
This big-talking leader of men lacks both compassion and tolerance, however, and it proves his undoing. Like the Roman mercenaries in Alan Garner's Red Shift (another linguistically uncompromising historical novel), his resistance movement is no more than courageous bluff and a gaggle of unkempt blokes living wild, one of many scattered pockets of "green men". He has no intention of joining the other bands, however: his jealousy of Hereward the Wake's resistance movement adds an almost comic touch to his character, but also reveals his monomaniac tendencies.
Set pieces full of suspense and a vivid sense of a much emptier landscape prove that, when it comes to description, less is more. With equal economy, particularly in the clipped dialogue, Kingsnorth keeps up the pace: the killing of a shaven-headed Norman thegn – "with my scramasax i saws up until his throta is cut and blaec blud then cums roarin out lic gathran wind" – leads to dreadful reprisals for an innocent hamlet. This troubles the men but not, alarmingly, their leader, an increasingly amoral force of nature whose ancient beliefs are now yesterday's news, and whose grandfather's idea of what is "triewe" – kings "of wodens blud" buried in great ships and so forth – leaves the grandson fatally out of touch. He is less a Christ figure than a man increasingly absurd in his paranoid self-delusion, picking up hints of doubt from his fellow guerrillas yet incapable of adjusting except through violence.
Repeated treacheries, however, suggest his caustic view of people is not so awry. The word "smercan" – "smiling" but also "smirking" – tolls eerily throughout, as does "cwelled" ("killed") and "fuccan", the latter making him sound like a beer-swilling yob, yelling at the world as it talks nothing but the proverbial "scit". His vision of a great black bird with human fingers and his hearing of voices make him either mad or a prophet, and this ambiguity troubles the tale's often lyrical surface until the surprising close. Like a redneck recluse stocking up his arsenal against apocalypse, Buccmaster is both utterly believable and quietly tragic – a man of limited intelligence faced with a monstrous change against which sheer bravado, driven by the earth gods though it is, can only shatter.
• Adam Thorpe's latest novel is Flight (Vintage).
Quote from: Syt on December 21, 2014, 11:21:27 AM
Knecht meaning servant/minion/vassal etc. German Ritter OTOH emphasizes the riding part instead.
In Danish "knægt" means "boy," "lad," or "young man" but with a connotation of being a bit wild and unruly. Similarly, the standard word for "boy" is "dreng" which apparently used to mean "valiant young man" (Old Norse) and "warrior" (Old English).
There seems to be a tendency for warrior words to drift in usage to describe boys.
QuoteThe Great Vowel Shift!?
I don't know Germanic language that well and I've had a weird couple of weeks.
In Dutch Knecht is "servant". bit funny that knight & knecht evolved from the same root :)
I was always told middle english sounded more like Dutch than current English.
Quote from: Archy on December 23, 2014, 06:36:21 AM
In Dutch Knecht is "servant". bit funny that knight & knecht evolved from the same root :)
I was always told middle english sounded more like Dutch than current English.
Certainly when I read it, but then we had a Dutch professor :lol:
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on December 21, 2014, 02:38:22 AM
There is possible evidence of Inca naval expeditions as far as Easter Island, but sadly no torpedo boats. :(
:D
Now that I think about it more I think Crunchy might have tried to argue that a navy of all torpedo boats would be more effective than a conventional navy with capital ships, etc. because the torpedo boats could swarm the enemy and overwhelm it. :hmm:
Well they are Incan after all, not Incant.
Quote from: Caliga on December 23, 2014, 07:32:18 AM
Now that I think about it more I think Crunchy might have tried to argue that a navy of all torpedo boats would be more effective than a conventional navy with capital ships, etc. because the torpedo boats could swarm the enemy and overwhelm it. :hmm:
I remember that part. I have a feeling he might have been arguing with grumbler.
What I can't remember is how he made the leap to the Incas.
In Spanish the word for knight is "caballero", meaning something akin to horseman but nowadays used to mean gentleman.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 23, 2014, 08:11:41 AM
What I can't remember is how he made the leap to the Incas.
I feel like somebody else did that for him. It seems like something Otto or Seedy would have done.
Quote from: The Larch on December 23, 2014, 08:14:28 AM
In Spanish the word for knight is "caballero", meaning something akin to horseman but nowadays used to mean gentleman.
Like chivalry in English, or Kavalier in German.