...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
OT: R*-M173 back migration
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mystery Solver: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl: Mystery Solver said: [QUOTE] . . . However, within Africa this diversity has virtually disappeared, both linguistically and phenotypically.[/QUOTE][b]False. Africans overall are the most diverse people on the planet. You can't be familiar with Africans, and proclaim that they aren't phenotypically or linguistically diverse notwithstanding close relationships.[/b] Genetically you are right. [/QUOTE]Genome is the bio-material essence of organisms, and so that is a big deal. Physically, if Africans aren't the most, they certainly are amongst the most diverse collectively. All put together in the complete biological sense, Africans do indeed turn out to be the most diverse. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl: Blench's point is that, given the much deeper time depth of human habitation of Africa compared to South America and/or Papua, one should see much more variation in African languages than is actually found.[/QUOTE]And what did I have to say about this, in my point-by-point laid out response to Blench which you decided not to address? [QUOTE]Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl: Items like isolate languages, and a much greater lexical difference, On the other hand African languages have a very diverse phonological, tonal, and consonantal diversity. Both of these can be explained, according to Blench, by 1) a fairly recent large expansion of a language phylum which explains the few isolates and the existence of just a few phyla. and 2) The absorption and borrowing from the numerous languages it overran which would provide the tonal, consonantal and morphological variation found.[/QUOTE]See post above, to see what you need to do. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl: I think a good analogy of what Blench's hypothesis occurring 20-30 KYA is the much more recent explosion of Bantu languages out of Cameroon and across Africa.[/QUOTE]Analogy of his 20-30 KYA language expansion of what? R1 along with proto-Nilo-Saharan perhaps? [QUOTE]Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl: The rest of your comments seem to me to be restatements of Blench's quote in different words, in that you emphasize the extent and relatively recent contact with each other of African languages.[/QUOTE]Please specify with citations, and how so. E.g.: Blench uses as qualifier, the idea of modern humans originating in Africa, by saying... [i][b]if modern humans did indeed come out of Africa[/b], and they already had some form of language, [b]then[/b] the languages of Africa [b]ought[/b] to be considerably more diverse than those in Papua or South America.[/i] Why [i]ought[/i] their languages be so, even if modern humans originated in Africa, and again, what did I have to say about this in my last post? My points are made with not only language in mind, but also with genetic depth to them. Is this not significant, vis-a-vis Blench's contextualization? How many African language phyla are you aware of? Do you think that all these phyla account for all the languages spoken in the continent? And again, what is the case being made; language expansion into Africa, or...? Because if not, what is the point? [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3