Paja Ul Deˀŋ

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Paja Ul Deˀŋ 17 CAES Vol. 6, № 2 (June 2020) Paja ul deˀŋ Alexander Akulov independent scholar; Saint Petersburg, Russia; e-mail: [email protected] Abstract Paja ul deˀŋ [padʒaul’deˀŋ] “People of big water” is a conventional name of Neolithic inhabitants of the territories of Saint Petersburg and Leningrad oblast in their hypothetical reconstructed language. In order to be able to speak about a certain ethnicity, it is necessary that this ethnicity would have a convenient designation. It is possible to state that these people spoke a Yenisseian language since upon the territory of East European plain there are some Yeniseian hydronyms. Also in the Sami language there are some words of Yeniseian origin. When an ethnicity known only by archaeological data acquires currently existing and well-described relatives – it is a remarkable fact. It is possible to reconstruct the worldview of Paja ul deˀŋ on the base of related cultures. Keywords: Paja ul deˀŋ; Neolithic period; Yeniseian languages; Pit-Comb ware Paja ul deˀŋ [padʒaul’deˀŋ] “People of big water” is a conventional name of Neolithic inhabitants of the territories of Saint Petersburg and Leningrad oblast in their hypothetical reconstructed language1. It is possible to state that these people spoke a Yenisseian language since upon the territory of East European plain there are some hydronyms of Yeniseian origin. For instance, in the basin of the Oka there are some creeks which names end with -ul/-ur: Chistur, Dandur, Mokshur, Nasmur, Ninur, Pynsur, Shershul (see fig 2 – 7). These hydronyms look like Yeniseian hydronyms existing in Siberia (for instance: Agul, Langur see fig. 11, 12). The ending of -ur/-ul looks much alike Yeniseian root “water” that has the following forms in different Yeniseian idioms: ul/ūl/ūr/kul. In Uralic and Indo-European languages there is no such root. Thus, the territory of the East European plain was inhabited by a western branch of Yeniseian people in the Neolithic period (Akulov, Efimova 2019). The name of Paja ul deˀŋ was created according to the standard model of self-naming of different groups of Yeniseian people: X deˀŋ – “people of something” and with due attention to the geographic context: the whole life of Neolithic people who lived upon the territories of Saint Petersburg and Leningrad oblast was closely connected with the Gulf of Finland and Lake Ladoga – both could be named paja ul – “big water”. In the Neolithic period the Baltic Sea (this stage of the Baltic Sea is named Littorina Sea) was deeper, saltier, and warmer than modern and therefore its fauna was much more diverse. The component paja ul has been made after Arin -ul “sea”/ “big water” (see: Yenisseian etymology “big”), and deˀŋ is the standard Yeniseian word for “people” (see: Yenisseian etymology “people”). It should also be noted that this Paja ul deˀŋ is the name of those Neolithic people who lived near the Gulf of Finland and Lake Ladoga, and other local groups can be named other ways. One can say that this is an invention of ethnicity, but then the case of Minoan culture also can be considered as an invention of ethnicity. In order to be able to speak about a certain ethnicity, it is necessary that this ethnicity would have a convenient designation. 1As far as there are no trustworthy sources on the language of these Neolithic people except some place names, so the language of the Paja ul deˀŋ is not actually a reconstruction, but mostly a constructed language on the base of Proto-Yeniseian and some other languages. Yeniseian languages are pretty closely related to Hattic language (Akulov 2019b), so it is possible to suppose that in some features the language of Paja ul deˀŋ was closer to Hattic. 18 CAES Vol. 6, № 2 (June 2020) Fig.1. The region where Paja ul deˀŋ lived (after Bing maps screenshot) Fig. 2. Gus river (original image source – Gus’) 19 CAES Vol. 6, № 2 (June 2020) Fig. 3. Chistur, Nasmur and Shershul creeks (map has been made after Yandex map screenshot) Fig. 4. Dandur creek (map has been made after Yandex map screenshot) 20 CAES Vol. 6, № 2 (June 2020) Fig. 5 Mokshur creek (map has been made after Yandex map screenshot) Fig. 6. Ninur (map has been made after Yandex map screenshot) 21 CAES Vol. 6, № 2 (June 2020) Fig. 7. Pynsur (map has been made after Yandex map screenshot) Fig. 8. Agul river (map has been made after Wikimedia Maps screenshot) 22 CAES Vol. 6, № 2 (June 2020) Fig. 9. Langur river (map has been made after Google and Yandex map screenshots) The fact of good preservation of hydronyms of Yeniseian origin in the basin of Oka correlates well with the fact that the traditions of Neolithic pottery (the Pit-Comb Ware) were maintained much longer in the basin of Oka than in other territories of East European plain. The technocomplex2 of Volosovo existed in the basin of Oka and upper Volga (fig. 10) in the 3rd – 2nd millennia BCE and so it is considered as technocomplex belonging to the Chalcolithic/Aeneolithic stage. However, the technocomplex of Volosovo continued traditions of pottery of the Lyalovo technocomplex that existed in the interfluve of Volga and Oka (fig. 10) in 4th millennia BCE, i.e., was a technocomplex of the Neolithic stage (Akulov 2019 a). In some other areas also can be found Yeniseian hydronyms with -ur/-ul endings. For instance, in Mari-El there is a river named Sesnur (fig. 14) and also there are some toponyms with -ul/-ur ending which, however, are difficult to be identified with certain rivers. The presence of such hydronyms in the territory of Mari-El is a clear and convex proof that in ancient times Yeniseain people inhabited a much vaster territory. Yeniseian toponymy in the Volga region and in the 2 In the current text the term technocomplex is used instead of widely used term archaeological culture. Technocomplex can be determined as a regularly repeated system of artifacts connected with a certain region. It is much more correct to avoid using term culture for there would be no associations with cultures which are subject of cultural anthropology, it is important to keep in mind that not every technocomplex is a culture, or, in other words, not every technocomplex assumes its own ethnic component. 23 CAES Vol. 6, № 2 (June 2020) Ural is a direct ‘bridge’ between the Western Yeniseian branch and the so-called historical/modern Yeniseian people. Fig. 10. The territory of Volosovo technocomplex is marked by strokes; the approximate territory of Lyalovo technocomplex is marked by violet line; red line marks the basin of Gus river (original image source – Krainov 1987: 12) It should be noted that not everywhere upon East European hydronyms of Yeniseian origin with -ur/-ul ending can be found easily, and it is pretty complicated to find some Yeniseian hydronyms in many areas of East European plain at all. However, as far as good preservation of the Yenisei toponymy is associated with long preservation of the tradition of the Pit-Comb ware it is possible to conclude that in those places where the Yeniseian toponymy is not found the presence of Pit-Comb ware marks the territory where lived people who spoke some Yeniseian language or a language related to Yeniseian (see fig. 12). Often can be met premise/prerequisite to suppose that Finno-Ugric people were the first inhabitants of East European plain and that Finno-Ugric people created the Pit-Comb Ware. Sometimes they say it more accurately: they speak about the ancestors of Finno-Ugric people. Some of those people who created Pit-Comb ware definitely were assimilated by Finno-Ugric people, but some definitely were not assimilated and so not all of them can be considered as ancestors of Finno-Ugric people. And also should be kept in mind the fact that the disintegration of Proto-Uralic language into several languages took place about 3000 BCE (Janhunen 2009) while Pit-Comb ware already 24 CAES Vol. 6, № 2 (June 2020) existed at that time3, so people speaking Uralic languages definitely could not be the creator of this pottery. Fig.11. Sesnur creek (map has been made after Yandex map screenshot) It is interesting to note that in Kildin Sami there are some words without convincing Uralic/Finno-Ugric (or any other) etymologies: kut’t’k “heart”, nirr – “cheek”, d’z’ – “water”, vuntas – “sand”, o v’n – “hummock”, k’ed’d’k – “stone”, bbr’ – “rain”, iŋŋk – “wind”, ket’t’k’ – “wolverine”, nigkeš – “pike” (fish), murr – “tree”, cigk – “mist”, mun – “frost”, in’ne – “to herd”, “to look after”, ujke – “to ski”, puaz – “reindeer”, ko n’n’t – “wild reindeer”, luh el’ – “1 y.o. reindeer”, sejjd – “deity”, ki ’tε – “to cook”, kuras – “empty”, modžes – “beautiful”, n’u ke – “to jump”, cke – “to throw”, tuллtε – “to boil”, kuarktε – “to boast”, лujx’ke – “to cry”, nissε – “to kiss”, madt – “trouble”, aps – “smell” (Pre-Finno-Ugric substrate). At least two of them can be correlated with Yeniseian words: d’z’ – “water” ~ Southern Ket “rivers”, Arin sat “river” (Yenisseian etymology “river”)4 iŋŋk – “wind” ~ Proto-Yenisseian *bej, (Yenisseian etymology “wind”), Hattic pezil, pizel, pizil (Soysal 2004: 300). 3 The Pit-Comb ware existed in 6th – 2nd millennia BCE. 4 It is an interesting fact that in Leningrad oblast there is a river named Syas (fig. 13). 25 CAES Vol. 6, № 2 (June 2020) The Sami were the first Finno-Ugric people who inhabited East European plain and they had direct contacts with Western Yeniseian people, and so they could borrow some words from the language of Paja ul deˀŋ. Fig. 12.
Recommended publications
  • Some Preliminary Notes on the Topography of Kaskaean Land
    12 CAES Vol. 4, № 3 (August 2018) Where can Kaskaean settlements be found? Some preliminary notes on the topography of Kaskaean land Alexander Akulov independent scholar; Saint Petersburg, Russia; e-mail: [email protected] Abstract Hittite sources about Kaska had no aims to describe Kaskaean land per se, but only described those Kaskaean terrains which were close to Hittite land, while most of Kaskaean lands were unknown for Hittites. Toponymy is the key for Kaskaean topography. Many Kaskaean toponyms were initially related to rivers, so it is perspective to look at names of rivers of Black Sea region. Kaska people were a branch of Hattians and a ‘bridge’ between Hattians and people speaking Northwest Caucasian languages. The most perspective location in Kaskaean region is Özlüce/Gelevara river. Word Gelevara contains component -vara that correlates with Hattic root ur(a/i) “well”, “spring” and with Common West Caucasian ʕarə “stream”, “torrent”. In Kaskaean region there are no other modern names of rivers containing -ura/-vara component: it seems that in the basin of Gelevara the density of Kaskaean population was relatively high and Kaskaean settlements potentially can be found there. Keywords: Kaska; topography of Kaska; Kaskaean toponymy; Gelevara river; Bronze Age Anatolia 1. Introduction into the problem Kaska people were people who lived in mountainous East Pontic Anatolia in the Bronze Age. Kaska people are mainly known from Hittite sources which describing Hittite – Kaska frontier1. The problem of precise borders of Kaska land still remains unsolved due to elusive nature of Kaskaean material culture remains (Yakar 2008: 817). However, it is possible to determine some landmarks as most probable and natural borders of Kaska land.
    [Show full text]
  • The University of Chicago Oriental Institute Seminars Number 2
    oi.uchicago.edu i THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ORIENTAL INSTITUTE SEMINARS NUMBER 2 Series Editors Leslie Schramer and Thomas G. Urban oi.uchicago.edu ii oi.uchicago.edu iii MARGINS OF WRITING, ORIGINS OF CULTURES edited by SETH L. SANDERS with contributions by Seth L. Sanders, John Kelly, Gonzalo Rubio, Jacco Dieleman, Jerrold Cooper, Christopher Woods, Annick Payne, William Schniedewind, Michael Silverstein, Piotr Michalowski, Paul-Alain Beaulieu, Theo van den Hout, Paul Zimansky, Sheldon Pollock, and Peter Machinist THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ORIENTAL INSTITUTE SEMINARS • NUMBER 2 CHICAGO • ILLINOIS oi.uchicago.edu iv Library of Congress Control Number: 2005938897 ISBN: 1-885923-39-2 ©2006 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. Published 2006. Printed in the United States of America. The Oriental Institute, Chicago Co-managing Editors Thomas A. Holland and Thomas G. Urban Series Editors’ Acknowledgments The assistance of Katie L. Johnson is acknowledged in the production of this volume. Front Cover Illustration A teacher holding class in a village on the Island of Argo, Sudan. January 1907. Photograph by James Henry Breasted. Oriental Institute photograph P B924 Printed by McNaughton & Gunn, Saline, Michigan The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Infor- mation Services — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. oi.uchicago.edu v TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Northwest Caucasian Languages and Hattic
    Kafkasya Calışmaları - Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / Journal of Caucasian Studies Kasım 2020 / November 2020, Yıl / Vol. 6, № 11 ISSN 2149–9527 E-ISSN 2149-9101 Northwest Caucasian Languages and Hattic Ayla Bozkurt Applebaum* Abstract The relationships among five Northwest Caucasian languages and Hattic were investigated. A list of 193 core vocabulary words was constructed and examined to find look-alike words. Data for Abhkaz, Abaza, Kabardian (East Circassian), Adyghe (West Circassian) and Ubykh drew on the work of Starostin, Chirikba and Kuipers. A sub-set list of 15 look-alike words for Hattic was constructed from Soysal (2003). These lists were formulated as character data for reconstructing the phylogenetic relationships of the languages. The phylogenetic relationships of these languages were investigated by a well-known method, Neighbor Joining, as implemented in PAUP* 4.0. Supporting and dissenting evidence from human genetic population studies and archeological evidence were discussed. This project has produced a provisional set of character data for the Northwest Caucasian languages and, to a limited extent, Hattic. Phylogenetic trees have been generated and displayed to show their general character and the types of differences obtained by alternate methods. This research is a basis for further inquiries into the development of the Caucasian languages. Moreover, it presents an example of the method for contrast queries application in studying the evolution of language families. Keywords: Northwest Caucasian Languages, Hattic, Historical Linguistics, Circassian, Adyghe, Kabardian * Ayla Bozkurt Applebaum, ORCID 0000-0003-4866-4407, E-mail: [email protected] (Received/Gönderim: 15.10.2020; Accepted/Kabul: 28.11.2020) 63 Ayla Bozkurt Applebaum Kuzeybatı Kafkas Dilleri ve Hattice Özet Bu araştırma beş Kuzeybatı Kafkas Dilleri ve Hatik arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektedir.
    [Show full text]
  • 9 to Which Language Family Does Chinese Belong, Or What's in a Name?
    9 To which language family does Chinese belong, or what's in a name? George van Driem There are at least five competing theories about the linguistic prehistory of Chinese. Two of them, Tibeto-Burman and Sino-Tibetan, originated in the beginning of the 19th century. Sino-Caucasian and Sino-Austronesian are products of the second half of the 20th century, and East Asian is an intriguing model presented in 2001. These terms designate distinct models of language relationship with divergent implications for the peopling of East Asia. What are the substantive differences between the models? How do the paradigms differently inform the direction of linguistic investigation and differently shape the formulation of research topics? What empirical evidence can compel us to decide between the theories? Which of the theories is the default hypothesis, and why? How can terminology be used in a judicious manner to avoid unwittingly presupposing the veracity of improbable or, at best, unsupported propositions? 1. The default hypothesis: Tibeto-Burman The first rigorous polyphyletic exposition of Asian linguistic stocks was presented in Paris by the German scholar Julius Heinrich von Klaproth in 1823. 1 His Asia Polyglotta was more comprehensive, extended beyond the confines ofthe Russian Empire and included major languages of East Asia, Southeast Asia and Polar America. Based on a systematic comparison of lexical roots, Klaproth identified and distinguished twenty-three Asian linguistic stocks, which he knew did not represent an exhaustive inventory. Yet he argued for a smaller number of phyla because he recognized the genetic affinity between certain of these stocks and the distinct nature of others.
    [Show full text]
  • Talking Neolithic: the Case for Hatto-Minoan and Its Relationship to Sumerian
    Talking Neolithic: The Case for Hatto-Minoan and its Relationship to Sumerian Peter Schrijver University of Utrecht It is argued that the Minoan language of second-millennium BC Crete stands a good chance of being descended from the language that was imported into Crete by the earliest farmers that colonized the Island in the 7th millennium BC. Evidence is presented that links Minoan to the Hattic language of second- millennium BC northern Anatolia. An analysis of the Hattic verbal system supports the hypothesis that in turn Hattic is related to Sumerian. The existence of a Hatto-Sumero-Minoan language family is posited, which predates the expansions of Semitic and Indo-European in the Near East and which is implicated in the spread of migrant farmers into Europe. A word for ’pig’ is reconstructed for that language family. 1. Language, genes and culture The expansion of a language across a geographical area takes place as a result of two mechanisms: the language is taken along by people who migrate into new territory, or the language is adopted by local populations beside or instead of their original language. Before the times of widespread formal education, mass media and the internet, language spread by acculturation always went hand in hand with spread by migration: only the presence of migrant native speakers in a new territory is capable of exposing the natives to the new language and of creating social pressure to adopt that language. Exposure and social pressure are what it takes for a population to trade its native language for a different one.
    [Show full text]
  • LCSH Section K
    K., Rupert (Fictitious character) K-TEA (Achievement test) Kʻa-la-kʻun-lun kung lu (China and Pakistan) USE Rupert (Fictitious character : Laporte) USE Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement USE Karakoram Highway (China and Pakistan) K-4 PRR 1361 (Steam locomotive) K-theory Ka Lae o Kilauea (Hawaii) USE 1361 K4 (Steam locomotive) [QA612.33] USE Kilauea Point (Hawaii) K-9 (Fictitious character) (Not Subd Geog) BT Algebraic topology Ka Lang (Vietnamese people) UF K-Nine (Fictitious character) Homology theory USE Giẻ Triêng (Vietnamese people) K9 (Fictitious character) NT Whitehead groups Ka nanʻʺ (Burmese people) (May Subd Geog) K 37 (Military aircraft) K. Tzetnik Award in Holocaust Literature [DS528.2.K2] USE Junkers K 37 (Military aircraft) UF Ka-Tzetnik Award UF Ka tūʺ (Burmese people) K 98 k (Rifle) Peras Ḳ. Tseṭniḳ BT Ethnology—Burma USE Mauser K98k rifle Peras Ḳatseṭniḳ ʾKa nao dialect (May Subd Geog) K.A.L. Flight 007 Incident, 1983 BT Literary prizes—Israel BT China—Languages USE Korean Air Lines Incident, 1983 K2 (Pakistan : Mountain) Hmong language K.A. Lind Honorary Award UF Dapsang (Pakistan) Ka nō (Burmese people) USE Moderna museets vänners skulpturpris Godwin Austen, Mount (Pakistan) USE Tha noʹ (Burmese people) K.A. Linds hederspris Gogir Feng (Pakistan) Ka Rang (Southeast Asian people) USE Moderna museets vänners skulpturpris Mount Godwin Austen (Pakistan) USE Sedang (Southeast Asian people) K-ABC (Intelligence test) BT Mountains—Pakistan Kā Roimata o Hine Hukatere (N.Z.) USE Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children Karakoram Range USE Franz Josef Glacier/Kā Roimata o Hine K-B Bridge (Palau) K2 (Drug) Hukatere (N.Z.) USE Koro-Babeldaod Bridge (Palau) USE Synthetic marijuana Ka-taw K-BIT (Intelligence test) K3 (Pakistan and China : Mountain) USE Takraw USE Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test USE Broad Peak (Pakistan and China) Ka Tawng Luang (Southeast Asian people) K.
    [Show full text]
  • The Idiom of Phaistos Disc Seems to Be a Relative of Hattic Language
    28 CAES Vol. 2, № 4 (December 2016) The idiom of Phaistos disc seems to be a relative of Hattic language Alexander Akulov independent scholar; St.Petersburg, Russia; e-mail: [email protected] Abstract Language of the disc has reduplication of root (blocks A3, A15) and well elaborated prefixation; it means that Minoan can probably be relative of Anatolian languages, or Hattic, or Sumerian (languages which also have well elaborated prefixation). Having attached readings of some known signs I discovered that certain syllables inside Minoan verbs are distributed in very alike positions as certain grammatical markers inside Hattic verb. For example: all verbs of the disc have se in terminal right positions that correlates with Hattic particle aš which is placed in the same position; there are many verbs with -qe- suffix that correlates with Hattic -e- suffix (supposedly a marker of tense/aspect); blocks A3, A15 have syllable te placed in the same position as Hattic orientation/location marker -te-; block A22 has sylable te in terminal left position that correlates with Hattic optative expressed by the same prefix in the same position. Key words: Phaistos disc; Minoan language; Hattic language 1. General notes on the disc Phaistos disc (pic. 3) was found by expedition led by Halbherr in 1908 in Phaistos upon the island of Crete (pic. 1); the disk is dated about 1800 – 1600 BC (Duhoux 1977); the disc is supposed to be an artifact of Crete origin (Duhoux 2000; Trauth 1990). Its writing system is syllabary (Ipsen 1929); writing system is of Cretan origin; and its immediate continuation is Linear A (Timm 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • Genomic Study of the Ket: a Paleo-Eskimo-Related Ethnic Group with Significant Ancient North Eurasian Ancestry
    Genomic study of the Ket: a Paleo-Eskimo-related ethnic group with significant ancient North Eurasian ancestry Pavel Flegontov1,2,3*, Piya Changmai1,§, Anastassiya Zidkova1,§, Maria D. Logacheva2,4, Olga Flegontova3, Mikhail S. Gelfand2,4, Evgeny S. Gerasimov2,4, Ekaterina E. Khrameeva5,2, Olga P. Konovalova4, Tatiana Neretina4, Yuri V. Nikolsky6,11, George Starostin7,8, Vita V. Stepanova5,2, Igor V. Travinsky#, Martin Tříska9, Petr Tříska10, Tatiana V. Tatarinova2,9,12* 1 Department of Biology and Ecology, Faculty of Science, University of Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic 2 A.A.Kharkevich Institute for Information Transmission Problems, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russian Federation 3 Institute of Parasitology, Biology Centre, Czech Academy of Sciences, České Budĕjovice, Czech Republic 4 Department of Bioengineering and Bioinformatics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russian Federation 5 Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Skolkovo, Russian Federation 6 Biomedical Cluster, Skolkovo Foundation, Skolkovo, Russian Federation 7 Russian State University for the Humanities, Moscow, Russian Federation 8 Russian Presidential Academy (RANEPA), Moscow, Russian Federation 9 Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA 10 Instituto de Patologia e Imunologia Molecular da Universidade do Porto (IPATIMUP), Porto, Portugal 11 George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA 12 Spatial Science Institute, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA *corresponding authors: P.F., email [email protected]; T.V.T., email [email protected] § the authors contributed equally # retired, former affiliation: Central Siberian National Nature Reserve, Bor, Krasnoyarsk Krai, Russian Federation. Abstract The Kets, an ethnic group in the Yenisei River basin, Russia, are considered the last nomadic hunter-gatherers of Siberia, and Ket language has no transparent affiliation with any language family.
    [Show full text]
  • Fantastic Beasts of the Eurasian Steppes: Toward a Revisionist Approach to Animal-Style Art
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2018 Fantastic Beasts Of The Eurasian Steppes: Toward A Revisionist Approach To Animal-Style Art Petya Andreeva University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Asian Studies Commons, and the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons Recommended Citation Andreeva, Petya, "Fantastic Beasts Of The Eurasian Steppes: Toward A Revisionist Approach To Animal- Style Art" (2018). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 2963. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2963 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2963 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Fantastic Beasts Of The Eurasian Steppes: Toward A Revisionist Approach To Animal-Style Art Abstract Animal style is a centuries-old approach to decoration characteristic of the various cultures which flourished along the urE asian steppe belt in the later half of the first millennium BCE. This astv territory stretching from the Mongolian Plateau to the Hungarian Plain, has yielded hundreds of archaeological finds associated with the early Iron Age. Among these discoveries, high-end metalwork, textiles and tomb furniture, intricately embellished with idiosyncratic zoomorphic motifs, stand out as a recurrent element. While scholarship has labeled animal-style imagery as scenes of combat, this dissertation argues against this overly simplified classification model which ignores the variety of visual tools employed in the abstraction of fantastic hybrids. I identify five primary categories in the arrangement and portrayal of zoomorphic designs: these traits, frequently occurring in clusters, constitute the first comprehensive definition of animal-style art.
    [Show full text]
  • Spatio-Temporal Data Mining of Major European River and Mountain Names Reveals Their Near Eastern and African Origins
    Spatio-Temporal Data Mining of Major European River and Mountain Names Reveals their Near Eastern and African Origins Peter Z. Revesz1[0000-0002-1145-1283] 1 University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln NE 68588, USA [email protected] Abstract. This paper presents a spatio-temporal data mining regarding the origin of the names of the 218 longest European rivers. The study shows that 35.2 percent of these river names originate in the Near East and Southern Cau- casus. The study also investigates the origin of European mountain names. It is shown that at least 26 mountain names originate from Africa. Keywords: Data Mining, Etymology, Mountain, River, Spatio-Temporal. 1 Introduction Archeology reveals three main expansions of human populations into Europe. The first of these expansions is an expansion from North Africa that was likely prompted by the desertification of the Sahara. The second expansion took place as is a Neolithic agricultural expansion from Anatolia or perhaps even from Mesopotamia. The popu- lation of this expansion is often called the group of Early European Farmers (EEF). The third expansion is a Bronze Age nomadic expansion from the Eurasian Steppe areas. The third expansion is commonly associated with the expansion of Proto-Indo- European (PIE) language speaking populations [1]. These expansions and other ex- amples of the spread of human populations can be studied today using various ar- chaeogenetics methods [2-4]. However, neither archeology nor archaeogenetics can identify the languages of the early North Africans and the EEFs. The goal of this re- search is to identify the languages of these groups based on the old European river and mountain names that may derive from those languages.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Institute for Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences 1068 Budapest, Benczúr U
    Research Institute for Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences 1068 Budapest, Benczúr u. 33. 1394 Budapest, P.O. Box 360. Tel.: +36-1-3510413 Fax: +36-1-3229297 E-mail: [email protected] Homepage: www.nytud.mta.hu Scientific report of the Research Institute for Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, for 2013 1 I. MAIN DUTIES OF THE RESEARCH UNIT IN 2013 Basic research Theoretical linguistics: Continuation of the project of Comprehensive Grammar Resources: Hungarian . Research on patterns of quantifier scope: the cooperation of syntax and semantics, the relation between prosody and scope. Investigations of linguistic variation in analogy- based models. Research on the syntax and semantics of non-declarative sentence types. Out- lining a new theory of linguistic politeness and language rituals. Finno-Ugric linguistics: Khanty and Tundra Nenets syntactic research; Research on language endangeredness and bi- lingualism in Samoyed, Saami, Ob-Ugric and Komi-Permyak languages; Language techno- logical research promoting language maintenance . Historical linguistics: Concluding the pro- ject titled Hungarian Generative Historical Syntax . Issuing a summary volume in English. Development of the databases on early linguistic documents and making them available to the public. Indo-European historical research on the ethnic composition of Late Hittite states . Applied research Experimental linguistics: Experimental investigation of linguistic and other cognitive abilities; preliminary eye movement tracking investigations. Description of dissociations between linguistic recursion and recursive theory-of-mind inferences in Alzheimer’s disease. Description of the Hungarian language profile of children with an impaired linguistic development. Investigation of kindergarten children’s linguistic abilities and numerical cognition. Experimental study of the role of boundary tones in sentence type discrimination.
    [Show full text]
  • Luwian Language
    “Ancient Cities and Reflections Todays’ World” Grundtvig Project Semader /Turkey Andolunun Antık Dönem Dilleri Languages of Anatolia in Ancient Times Spain Alicante 21-25/03/2012 • Anatolian languages belongs to Indo- Europian language family and it is no longer exist today. • Anatolian languages had spoken from begining 2th and 1th centuries B.C until Hellenistic time by the people who lived in Anatolia area Civilizations in Anatolia Anatolian Languages • Hitit language between 1600-1100 B.C . It was offical language of Hitit Empire • Luwian (luwili), is close relative of Hitit language.It was spoken nearer lands of areas under controle of Hitit’s. It was spoken in Iron time in the landas of Likya.It comes from the roots of Luivi language. • Milyan language is known from the only one inscription. It is a polish of Likya language • Karya language was spoken in Karya.It is known from the some parts of inscriptions in Egpty left by the soldiers of the Karya in B.C.7th cent. • Pasidya Language was spoken in the nortwest Anatolia (near Kastamonu City today).Roots goes back B.C.18th cent. And ıt was lost in B.C. 13th cent.It is known in some parts of inscriptions of Hitit’s. • Lidya Language was spoken in Lidya and got lost in B.C. 1th cent. • There are some other languages in this group which are probably had not left and trace. KUR URUHa-at-ti Map of languages which were spoken ,n Anatolia in B.C 2000. • Yellow area is the centere of Hitit language.
    [Show full text]