Joined: 10-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 769
QuoteReplyTopic: How would albanian sound to a non-ethnic? Posted: 24-Oct-2006 at 13:18
I believe that the 15% of difference is due to the fact that prof. Trifone (who is the Director of the School of Linguistics at the University of Siena, near Florence) includes even the words that are phonetically loanworded from a previous language borrowing.
Let me explain in plain English:
I was thinking the samething. But more along the line of the recent decades "Italianization" of the Albanian dialect from Tirana, not alone but also English.
My only problem is that this should be distinguished from the latin borrowings from the ages. These inheritances are morphed to begin with(being changed to English) then transfer to Albanian... They are not direct Latin borrowings.
My main concern was actually on the discussion going on before, Albanian historical connection to latin.
Whell thought one man... Noone in the Balkans knows thwir ansestry... thats a fact.
But you say you are a greek and I say i'm a Macedonian. Its that simple.
When the slavs came down to settle in Macedonia, they mixed with the peoples that wore alredy here( ancient Macedonians). And when i say mixed i mean 50%-50% or 40%-60% not 95%-5% (get it so far?)
The trouth behind this is just look at me, I dont deni that i have slavic genes but i will never step down from my Macedonian ancestry. I have bowth slavic and Macedonian geans and you can see it on me.
The thing is that u deni anithing. there was a gene test a cuple years back but i never saw results.
One example
We speak a slavic dialect
but we have christianity from the Ancient Macedonians.
We still have side by side Ancient Macedonian Names used for todays names of people (usualy of rivers and regions) and we have slavic names.
I jus dont get it...
Does this mean that im half Macedonian half slavic
And yes shore ... slvic does not comply with Macedonian... bla bla
But
wridlle me this:
Why in the Macedonian language that i speak, we have so many songs about Macedonians, Macedonia and so forth.
These songs a written way before "propaganda" came out and have been sung among Macedonians for as long as we can remember. Infact i can bet u (procetige wize) Macedonians have written more songs about Macedonia then any other nation, has written sonsg about themselfs.
So tell me how many Greek songs of today and previus centuries, sing about the grateness of Macedonia and its Peoples?
Make a note that villigers(where most of the songs originated) wore never under political presure and they always sang what they felt. They felt Macedonians for a reason, because of a connection, and there is no denying that.
hahah bulgarians by the way are not my brothers and never will be. I deny any similarities with them... even the so called "slavic line" and dont offend me like that.. because as i see it the greeks of modern greece are not exactly the ancient ones (whell atleast most of them that is).
My feelings about my ancestors arre clear even in my nickname... but since u insist
My beginings wore ancient Macedonians, My middle age granfathers wore macedonians, My dad is macedonian and so am I... I am a Macedonian and i freely declare that.
If you belive this ist so... then tell me what makes a Macedonian? and tell me What claims do you have about you being "macedonian" and using the macedonian symbols(if u used them for other reasons, such as meaning of power and unity then u dont have to answer the last question).
because as i see it the greeks of modern greece are not exactly the ancient ones (whell atleast most of them that is).
Where did you see that???
what makes a Macedonian?
Of course not only the place you live,Americans aren't Apache just because they live in America...
The traditions,the continuous history etc and of course the language. A language which is descedant of the language Alexander himself spread to all over the world.
Don't be afraid we don't have any territorial claims.Its our right to defend our history and symbols.
Answer to my previous questions and don't avoid them...
Ok so you say cal my self a panonian-slav not a macedonian?
mmm good point by why dont you look at maps prior 1912 u know nder the turkis rule... if u dont have one ill provide u with one.
Ok we all know alexander III had graeat archer... i wonder where they came from... ohhhh yes the previously conqured and assimilated panonians... dont you think this is so?
Hehehe i dont mention the panonians because they wore alredy part of the macedonian culture and life... and + teritorial scares are not my reagon ... just dont mentione it or i will be forced to stray away from the toppic...
Dont make teritorial claims... u have enough as it is...
sorry to all moderators but i was forced in this argument.
because as i see it the greeks of modern greece are not exactly the ancient ones (whell atleast most of them that is).
Where did you see that???
what makes a Macedonian?
Of course not only the place you live,Americans aren't Apache just because they live in America...
The traditions,the continuous history etc and of course the language. A language which is descedant of the language Alexander himself spread to all over the world.
Don't be afraid we don't have any territorial claims.Its our right to defend our history and symbols.
Answer to my previous questions and don't avoid them...
Apaches ate bizons and worshiped Manitu, whereas modern americans eat hamburgers and worship green banknotes [JOKINGLY (sic!)].
Patrinos, can you point me to any tradition known in Ancient Macedonia that persisted in Modern Greeks but not Modern Slavomacedonians?
When the slavs came down to settle in Macedonia, they mixed with the peoples that wore alredy here( ancient Macedonians).
And when i say mixed i mean 50%-50% or 40%-60% not 95%-5% (get it so far?)
The people who were there were the ancient Macedonians? In 600-650 AD? I doubt there was anyone there feeling nationaly Macedonian (and not "Roman"-Byzantine), having different religion than the rest of the citizens of Byzantine empire (Orthodox instead of Pagan slavs) and speaking other language than koene Greek.
If u think that Alexander's children were hanging around in that time ,well u must think it again.
Also,if u think that it would be rational for someone who: -lived in his "homeland", -inside the borders of his state, -spokea language written for 1500 years,used by public officers, -had his own land, -hada higher level of technical development, -believed in a monotheistic religion with organized church,
would abandon all this and get mixed with some people who: -were "new-comers", -were living inside the borders of a foreign empire -at first didnt have land, -were speaking an non-written language, -had lower level of technical development, -living in mud-huts(at first), -believing in some pagan religion
and in a proportion up to 50-50 % (how did u come up with this percentege..not much scientific way i guess),
,rather than being assimilated by the dominant "Romans", then think iy some more time
hehe if macedonians wore assimilated by the powerfull romans than greeks of today (along with egyptians and so on) in your way of thinking are assimilated too...
hehe if macedonians wore assimilated by the powerfull romans than greeks of today (along with egyptians and so on) in your way of thinking are assimilated too...
:P
this is how i understand yur theory
what? can u understand what u have written ?
its simple both southern greeks and macedonians were "byzantines"/"romans" in 600 AD.
Also,if u think that it would be rational for someone who: -lived in his "homeland", -inside the borders of his state, -spokea language written for 1500 years,used by public officers, -had his own land, -hada higher level of technical development, -believed in a monotheistic religion with organized church,
would abandon all this and get mixed with some people who: -were "new-comers", -were living inside the borders of a foreign empire -at first didnt have land, -were speaking an non-written language, -had lower level of technical development, -living in mud-huts(at first), -believing in some pagan religion
and in a proportion up to 50-50 % (how did u come up with this percentege..not much scientific way i guess),
,rather than being assimilated by the dominant "Romans", then think iy some more time
Some molecular biologists did that instead of theMacedonian and their results are:
Department of Immunology and Molecular Biology, H. 12 de Octubre, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain. aarnaiz@eucmax.sim.ucm.es
HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing. HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances, neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. The following conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the "older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians (including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese, Turks (Anatolians), Armenians and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305, *0307, *0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in pharaonic Egypt.
If they would not mixe they would be different. Actually to me result says that slavs were much less numerous in this mix, just as winners they made their language as major.
Don't get confused with "sub-Saharan" genes. Greeks came to early to be considered as people of the same branch. And more detailed study of same authors supports this.
Full text article could be obtained from almost any university (or computer with university IP ).
To get this post less offtopic, I must say that it seems that Albanians belong to the same Mediterranean substratum.
Department of Immunology and Molecular Biology, H. 12 de Octubre, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain. aarnaiz@eucmax.sim.ucm.es
HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing. HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances, neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. The following conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the "older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians (including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese, Turks (Anatolians), Armenians and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305, *0307, *0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in pharaonic Egypt.
If they would not mixe they would be different. Actually to me result says that slavs were much less numerous in this mix, just as winners they made their language as major.
Don't get confused with "sub-Saharan" genes. Greeks came to early to be considered as people of the same branch. And more detailed study of same authors supports this.
Full text article could be obtained from almost any university (or computer with university IP ).
To get this post less offtopic, I must say that it seems that Albanians belong to the same Mediterranean substratum.
The "some molecular biologists" appear to be rather "a group of biased and politically motivated biologists", thus non-credible.
Its at least suspect reading among them names as K. Dimitroski, M. Blagoevska, V. Zdravkovska, but reading their whole 'research' it leaves no doubt why Mark Jobling, author of "Human Evolutionary Genetics", uses this Arnaiz-Villena's research as "an example of misguided interpretation".
I liked the remarks of the research about Palestinians (note that you post here only a part refering to Greeks and not the whole research) and especially their allegations about Japanese.
To make it short, i provide the answer from one of the top geneticists, Luca Cavalli-Sforza.
Dropped genetics paper lacked scientific merit Nature 415, 115 (10 January 2002); doi:10.1038/415115b
Sir Even though the controversial withdrawal of a paper on the genetic relatedness of Palestinians and Jews by the journal Human Immunology (see Nature 414, 382; 2001) is a minor episode compared with the tragedies caused by ethnic/religious conflicts over past decades, the issues involved are worth revisiting.
The stated purpose of the paper by Antonio Arnaiz-Villena et al. was to "examine the genetic relationships between the Palestinians and their neighbours (particularly the Jews) in order to: (1) discover the Palestinian origins, and (2) explain the historic basis of the present ... conflict between Palestinians and other Muslim countries with Israelite Jews". They conclude: "Jews and Palestinians share a very similar HLA genetic pool that supports a common ancient Canaanite origin. Therefore, the origin of the long-lasting JewishPalestinian hostility is the fight for land in ancient times."
It is difficult to believe that knowledge of genes may help to explain the present conflict. Although population genetics can address issues of relatedness of populations, mating patterns, migrations and so on, obviously it cannot provide evidence about reasons for conflicts between people.
Our primary concern, however, is that the authors might be perceived to have been discriminated against for political, as opposed to legitimate scientific, reasons.
Even a cursory look at the paper's diagrams and trees immediately indicates that the authors make some extraordinary claims. They used a single genetic marker, HLA DRB1, for their analysis to construct a genealogical tree and map of 28 populations from Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Japan. Using results from the analysis of a single marker, particularly one likely to have undergone selection, for the purpose of reconstructing genealogies is unreliable and unacceptable practice in population genetics.
The limitations are made evident by the authors' extraordinary observations that Greeks are very similar to Ethiopians and east Africans but very distant from other south Europeans; and that the Japanese are nearly identical to west and south Africans. It is surprising that the authors were not puzzled by these anomalous results, which contradict history, geography, anthropology and all prior population-genetic studies of these groups. Surely the ordinary process of refereeing would have saved the field from this dispute.
We believe that the paper should have been refused for publication on the simple grounds that it lacked scientific merit.
Neil Risch Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California 94305, USA
Alberto Piazza Department of Genetics, Biology and Biochemistry, University of Torino, Via Santena 19, 10126 Torino, Italy
L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California 94305, USA
A mathematician is a person who thinks that if there are supposed to be three people in a room, but five come out, then two more must enter the room in order for it to be empty.
That is another paper and I read it as well. It was just unrelated to the question. It seems that you didn't read them.
About Macedonians it was checked by different markers
1. HLA-DRB1, DRB3/4/5 and DQB1 polymorphism (Tissue Antigens. 2000 Jan;55(1):53-6.) by Hristova-Dimceva A, Verduijn W, Schipper RF, Schreuder GM. 2. HLA-A,-B,-DRB1 in Tissue Antigens Volume 60 Page 496 - December 2002 by M. Ivanova1, E. Rozemuller2, N. Tyufekchiev3, A. Michailova1, M. Tilanus2, E. Naumova1
3. Which is more precise by Alu insertion polymorphism by
As for the list of authors, in our field major contributers are first and last author. Last author determines the research and the first does most part of experiments. I am rather sure in Human Genetics situation is the same.
Explanation of molecular biology results by polytical reasons reveals that explaining person is not familiar with the topic. It is rather easy to repeate those experiments. Up to now I didn't find any publication showing different result.
And finally, this:
It is difficult to believe that knowledge of genes may help to explain the present conflict. Although population genetics can address issues of relatedness of populations, mating patterns, migrations and so on, obviously it cannot provide evidence about reasons for conflicts between people.
was not the major aim of the paper you speak about. More precisely accents were on relatedness of the populations but not conflict between them.
Response of Antonio Arnaiz-Villena et al. would be also usefull:
Sir:
Neil Risch et al. in Correspondence1 state that our paper2 on the genetic relatedness of Palestinians and Jews lacked scientific merit because its conclusions are based on data reported for a single-locus genetic marker (HLA-DRB1). Although the use of single-locus markers can lead to misleading results, single-locus studies, whether using HLA or other markers, are common in this field and are regularly published in the specialist literature.
In papers reporting data on a single locus, it is important not to take anomalous results at face value but to interpret them in the light of other types of data, such as historical, anthropological and linguistic data, as well as testing them using other genetic markers (see, for example, ref. 3). As we stated in ref. 2, we are currently investigating the populations reported in our paper using other markers.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Share Topic
Printable Version
Google
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Windows Live
Yahoo Bookmarks
reddit
Facebook
MySpace
Newsvine
Furl
Topic Options
