Annonce

Réduire
Aucune annonce.

Nostratique et Afro-Asiatique

Réduire
X
 
  • Filtre
  • Heure
  • Afficher
Tout nettoyer
nouveaux messages

  • Nostratique et Afro-Asiatique

    http://www*geocities*/therapeuter200...dispersal.html
    1/Afro-Asiatique
    An even more interesting connection between PIE and PAA is Bomhard’s 318 "Proto" roots. According to the above revised version of the phonetic constituents, Bomhard found 318 roots of both proto-languages that had almost exact correspondence in both sound and meaning. This is some of the evidence that leads him to conclude that
    Indo-European and Afroasiatic bear a stronger affinity, both in their phonological systems and in their vocabularies, than could possibly have been produced by accident–so strong, indeed, that no linguist could examine them without believing them to have sprung from a common source. (1984:2)
    The presence of Afroasiatic speakers in North Africa is due to successive waves of expansion from the Near East, each representing a contemporary form of post-Afroasiatic. In the earliest phase, the language may have been close to contemporary Indo-European, having the same SOV syntactic order inherited from Nostratic, and presumably much the same morphology, but already exhibiting the characteristic Afroasiatic feminine in t, which seems to be peculiar to this family. This wave, with its early Nostratic language, must have represented the first flush of Mesolithic influence in Africa, preceding the advent of the agricultural Neolithic in that region. It extended as far as the Ethiopian highlands and the Chad Basin to the Northwest of them, but there bogged down after converting the local African peoples to Nostratic speech as represented by the Cushitic, Omotic, and Chadic speakers of today… It is probable that the Cushitic and Omotic languages still retain traces of early Nostratic morphology…
    “Later Southward waves of Afroasiatic speakers occurred at times when the old SOV pattern had changed – or was in process of changing – to the historically observed VSO pattern, accounting for the Berber and Old Egyptian speakers, the Semites of Syria, Palestine, Arabia, and Ethiopia, and eventually the Arabic expansion of the present era. The Semitic expansions seem to have been relatively late since their languages are less diverse than in the other branches. This is in harmony with the suggestion… that the early Indo-Europeans and Semites were neighbors in or near the Caucasus at a fairy late period.
    “Thus, the diversity of the Cushitic and Omotic languages is not due to their speakers’ occupying the original homeland of Afroasiatic expansion [the rejected somewhat ‘unconventional’ proposal], but simply to the fact that these languages represent remnants of early Afroasiatic extended to its Southernmost extreme and evolving in relative isolation from currents of change in the major part of the Afroasiatic speaking world. There is a parallel situation in Northeastern Siberia, where such highly differentiated languages as Gilyak and Chukchi have evolved in isolation from their relatives in the rest of Siberia…” (p. 158 - 59).
    The evolution of the Afroasiatic family is then similar to that of the Sinic: as the proto-language spread outward from a center, the outwardmost extensions of the language, being the earliest to depart from the ancestral center, was the most conservative and the most preservative of the elements of the ancestral language, while the language-form of the ancestral homeland went through so much radical changes that the descendant, modern-day form in the area of the ancestral homeland looks hardly like anything of the proto-language.

    The Afroasiatic family is special here in being the most divergent from the rest of Nostratic and consequently “has some features that seem to be peculiar and ancient. These include the feminine in t, the second-person pronominal affix k, and perhaps the prefix conjugation of the verb. It may be that Afroasiatic represents a transitional form between a local (Caucasic) version of Dene-Caucasian and the rest of Nostratic, properly speaking. In this sense, Afroasiatic could indeed be the ‘oldest’ of the Nostratic families…” (p. 159).4
    “…I conclude that the syntactic structure of the simple sentence in the earliest Nostratic, and probably much of the ancestral Dene-Caucasian as well, was undoubtedly SOV” (p. 159).

    The Nostratic focal expansion, the third "out of Near East", is thus: beginning at 15,000 BP, a local Dene-Caucasian village south of Caucasus began to expand as the Mesolithic expansion. It split into proto-Afro-Asiatic at the west and the ancestral group of the rest of the Nostratic at the east. (Or the alternative interpretation that the local Dene-Caucasian subgroup split into the proto-Afro-Asiatic on the west and the Nostratic proper on the east.) The proto-Afro-Asiatics have been identified by archaeologists with the Natufians in the territories of Syria and Palestine. “Judging solely from their lexicon, it appears that the Natufians were relatively advanced: they built fortified structures from stone; they cultivated land, raised cattle and hunted with bow and arrow… The Natufians also developed a market system, evident in the existence of words for buy, sell, and price, and they waged war on (kih) and raided (ghwar) their neighbors. Prehistoric poets – or perhaps lawyers – were known for their ability to ‘draw magic signs on sand.’ [Compare these with the emblems the Yang-Shao peoples carved on their potteries.] There were even Natufian haves and have-nots: the rich, who owned w-s-r, or expensive things; those who s-r-kk, or stole; and others made a living by pawning stolen goods…” (Shevoroshkin, ibid., p. 23 – 4.) These proto-Afro-Asiatics, whose linguistic state was still that of general Nostratic (or late Dene-Caucasian subgroup locally), the SOV type, then during their first wave of expansion covered up all of Syriac/ Arabic/ Palestine area and all of North Africa, from the tip of Somalia at the east to the west coast of North Africa. These new colonizers of Africa were of caucasian surface-phenotype; and as their tribes encountered the native Africans, genetic admixtures took place with the natives contributing the major part to the genetic constitution of their common descendants and the new comers the minor part. In linguistic respect however the colonizers had the upperhand, converting native Africans to their Afro-Asiatic speech while the native tongues of North Africa were lost in the process. This is similar to the manner in which the (nuclear) genetic composition of the Ethiopians, for example, was constituted, which constitution however may have been the result of a slow process of admixture since the first wave but not completed until historical times,5 and which consists in a majority of African frequencies plus a minority of Caucasian, reflecting an original mixture of a majority of native Africans with a minority of Caucasians.6 Then a second wave of Afro-Asiatic expansion exploded from the Palestine-Syriac center (the Afro-Asiatic "homeland"), probably for reasons associated with the genesis of agriculture, which would locate this expansion at about 10,000 BP. The new expansion into North Africa again virtually covered up the entire area of the first Afro-Asiatics' north African settlement. By this date, 5000 years after, the Afro-Asiatic dialect in the center ("homeland") had already evolved into the VSO structure recognized today as characteristic of it, seen most conspicuously in the Semitic (e.g. Arabic and Hebrew). Most of the North African speakers of Afro-Asiatic dialects who were descended from the first wave were converted to the speech of the new Afro-Asiatic colonizers, their languages being lost from history. Those Afro-Asiatic dialects from the first wave that survived are located on the periphery: the Cushitic, the Omotic and the Chadic. (See the genealogical tree above left.) The genealogy shows that during the possibly 5,000 years before the second expansion the Afro-Asiatic language field of North Africa had first split into a western dialect, whose modern descendant is the Chadic group, and an eastern dialect, which then split into its western Omotic and eastern Cushitic groups.7 The second wave split into the western Berber groups8 and the eastern Egyptian, which configuration persisted into historic times. Within the central ("homeland") region, there must have been a third, Semitic expansion to cover up a large portion of the Near East and Arabia. The latest Afro-Asiatic expansion, that of the Arabs from the Arabian peninsula ca. 600 A.D., again intruded into North Africa to convert the Egyptian and many of the Berber speakers to the Arabic language. Thus focal expansion occurred repeatedly just within the Afro-Asiatic family itself.
    Dernière modification par humanbyrace, 25 avril 2009, 22h59.
    يا ناس حبّوا الناس الله موصّي بالحبْ ما جاع فقير إلا لتخمة غني¡No Pasarán! NO to Fascism Ne olursan ol yine gel

  • #2
    2/Nostratique
    The basic pattern of the expansion of the Homo sapiens sapiens on the Eurasian continent, of “the peopling of Eurasia,” is of the “ripple” type, with the Near East in the center pumping waves after waves of immigrants to the east (East Asia), west (Europe), and somewhat later, namely after the retreat of the last ice-age, north and south (back to North Africa). The model of Eurasia-peopling is, that is to say, “Out of the Near East Again and Again.” The first wave has just been described and the linguistic vestiges of it identified. Around 40,000 years or so BP, a second wave of immigration “radiated” outward from the Near East center (“homeland”) to both East Asia and Europe. It’s quite possible that many of the descendants of the “first wave”, already resident in the larger part of South Asia, were “assimilated” by the second wave, the linguistic field of which covered up large section of South Asia. That is, they adopted the customs and languages of the new-comers, having lost their own linguistic and cultural identities. This is a too-often repeated pattern in the story of humans-coming-to-be-in-where-they-are-today, as we shall see. On the other side, arriving in Europe, the immigrants of the “second wave,” the first Homo sapiens sapiens to there turn up, quickly swept across and populated all over the frozen continent (“lasting 5 to 10,000 years”; p. 66, Cavalli-Sforza et al. The History and Geography of Human Genes). They brought with them the more sophisticated Aurignacian lithic culture, in contrast with the local, Mousterian culture of the Homo sapiens neanderthalensis. They brought about, too, the extinction of the latter through their more accelerated population growth. This second wave is today identified as the Dene-(Sino-)Caucasian substratum, at this time constituting a vast dialect field extending over the entire Eurasia from the tip of Spain to probably as far as the coast of Northeast Asia. The time is approximately 30,000 years BP.
    The European sub-culture of this vast Dene-Caucasian substratum has today left its traces in our memory as the “Cro-Magnon Man.”1 & 2 But only few vestiges from this “second wave” remain today. In the European west the only (linguistic) remnant today is the Basque (in southern France and northern Spain). To the east, the rest of the Dene-Caucasian substratum still remaining includes the north Caucasian family, Burushaski (of Pakistan), Sino-Tibetan, Yeniseian (Siberia), and Na-Dene of North America. Now if we want to identify the bearers of the language ancestral to today’s Chinese languages at this time, i.e. around 30,000 years BP, we can surmise that they were probably at this time no longer in the Near East but were to be found near the Himalayan region, the actual homeland of the Sino-Tibetan family 20,000 years or so later.
    I want to retrack and put emphasis on the fact that the first “Europeans,” the “Cro-Magnon Man,” who pushed the Neanderthals into ever more unfavorable ecological niches and eventually into extinction, were most probably Dene-Caucasians and not the Indo-Europeans that according to all accounts arrived here only more than 20,000 years later. I’ve always been intrigued by the Europeans today who, when visiting museums of natural history, identified the reconstructions (models and images) of the Cro-Magnon Man they saw as their “(direct) ancestor,” and even by the museum curators who wrote the explanations for the pieces exhibited as if this Cro-Magnon Man were truly (directly) ancestral to themselves and the visitors staring wondrously at the reconstructions. (The museum curators, by virtue of their education, of course knew of the later coming of the “Indo-europeéns.”) The source of this illusion is certainly the fact that they all are on the same continent. The Cro-Magnon Man is ancestral to modern Europeans only in the sense that most of the genetic constitution of modern Europeans are inherited from Cro-Magnon Man;2 but certainly not in the linguistic sense. The complication involved in identifying an “ancestor” reflects the complex pattern of the process of people-coming-to-be-where-they-are-today.
    We now come to the “third wave,” the third “Out of Near East.” Most of today’s linguistic and ethnic diversity on Eurasia continent in fact had its origin in this third, Nostratic focal expansion. Let me read to you from the excellent statement on this topic, Allan R. Bomhard and John C. Kern’s The Nostratic Macrofamily (Mouton de Gruyter, 1994). First, his concluding statement on the previous, second focal expansion, that of Dene-Caucasian.
    “As always in hunter-gatherer societies, mobility was at a premium. Canoes were used for water travel and snow shoes and sleds were developed for overland travel in winter. The conditions were favorable for the rapid spread of tribes and their new linguistic family over immense distances. This expansion, which is called Mesolithic, is indicated archaeologically by microliths found all along Northern Eurasia and Southward through the Caucasus into the Near East, where it later developed smoothly into the Neolithic with its domestication of cereals and of animals suitable for food and fibers.
    “The Mesolithic culture is aptly named, for it provided a gradual though rapid transition between the Upper Paleolithic and the agricultural Neolithic. There was, in fact, a steady advance in man’s ability to control and exploit his environment…”
    the Mesolithic culture, with its Nostratic language, had its beginning in or near the Fertile Crescent just south of the Caucasus, with a slightly later northern extension into Southern Russia in intimate association with woods and fresh water in lakes and rivers. From these positions, it had ready access to the lower Danube and the Balkans (Indo-European), to the Caucasus (Kartvelian), south of the Caucasus into Mesopotamia, Palestine, Egypt, and the rest of North Africa (Sumerian and Afroasiatic), eastward into Central Siberia (Elamo-Dravidian), and northward and thence eastward along the Circumpolar fringe (Uralic-Yukaghir, Altaic, Chukchi-Kamchatkin, Gilyak, and Eskimo-Aleut [: these together with Indo-European constitute the Eurasiatic subgroup within Nostratic). In the process of its expansion, it undoubtedly effected a linguistic conversion of many tribes of Dene-Caucasian or other origins; this accounts for the fact that non-Nostratic languages in Eurasia in historic times have been found mostly as relics in mountainous regions. Exceptions are Chinese and the now moribund or extinct Ket, which, together with Hattic and Hurrian, probably represent post-Nostratic reemergences of Dene-Caucasian speakers from their relic areas
    The above passage emphasizes for us once more the trend of history we have already noticed: focal expansion. The configuration of ethnic/linguistic distribution in Eurasia today is mostly the product of migrations in very recent times, starting at 15,000 years BP. Except for China and Southeast Asia the entire Eurasia from Berling Strait (and beyond: part of Northern Canada also) to the tip of Spain – and including North Africa too – is today covered by languages that are the descendants of the language of (very probably) a single village in the south of Caucasus mountain only 15,000 years ago. Is it surprising to you that the ethnological map we have today of Eurasia really does not reflect anything ancient?
    Meanwhile, the Circumpolar families were developing in a situation that was geographically and environmentally separate. Here the Mesolithic way of life has been maintained continuously to recent times; any impulses toward agriculture have been late, and except for the Finno-Ugrians, they all have been received from non-Indo-European sources. The linguistic developments have been equally idiosyncratic. In all of these families the SOV word order and associated morphological principles of early Indo-European have been retained except where subjected to alien influences in more recent times, and they have been maintained with special purity in Altaic and Elamo-Dravidian, which may well have been of Siberian origin. In vocabulary, they show little in common with Indo-European or Afroasiatic except at a strictly pre-agricultural level.
    يا ناس حبّوا الناس الله موصّي بالحبْ ما جاع فقير إلا لتخمة غني¡No Pasarán! NO to Fascism Ne olursan ol yine gel

    Commentaire

    Chargement...
    X