Indo-European and Uralic families.

I've heard that finn-urgic languages were spoken in parts of Europe before Indo-European languages arrived, at the very least they were around the Baltic 2000+ years ago alreadyi, so attributing it to the mongols would seem dumb. Hungry/Magyar or course is relativly more recent in its present location, but even that predates the Mongols.

Finurgic and Altaic are not the same family, but often linked together out of convinience. That said, they are probably more similar to each other than they are to many other language families.

Some of people claims Finns, and Estons are central asia origined people who live north-east europea. They claim, Uralic language is an last affixed language like Turkish, Tatar.. As a Crimean Tatar origined person, i NEVER think Finns, Estons or Modern Hungarians are related Turks. Finns and Estons look like Skandinavians, and they usually have dolicocephal (long) skull-type. i think they are actually teutonic origined, maybe their language changed during Mogol raids. i also don't think Mogols are also Turkic origined cause they look like more chinese or south asians, and their language were changed old strong Turk Empires before Islam religion..

Physical appearance has nothing to do with linguistics.

Originally posted by Kalevipoeg "Yes, but if order in families and wich languages belongs to a family is still disputed. For example in other Maps was Estnian, Finanian and Hungarian belongs  to the Mongol/Tartarian/Turkish languages." Well when my ancestors arrived where we live today, they were similar looking to modern Mongols. Then they mixed with the next immigrants. It could be quite realistic that a few words could be similar to even modern Turkish or Mongol ones.

Most likely highly untrue. The Balto-Finnic populations are clearly European in genetic make-up, no different from other Europeans. The language may have come from the east, but even that is questionable. The 'science' of linguistics, especially of Finno-Ugric linguistics, has a long tradition of prejudice and false conclusions. Forget this mongol talk.

If possible, try to obtain a copy of Kalevi Wiik's newest book. His theories are rather 'wild', yet thought arousing.

Originally posted by Phallanx Based on this fact, many have come to the conclusion that the IE language has existed in Europe since the Ice Age, which is exactly what archaeologic and DNA evidence are starting to suggest.

People very often change their language. And a language can spread in huge territories without great moving of peoples.

A newer theory, formulated during the 1990�s, says that during the Ice Age the ancestors of the Finns lived at one of the three habitable areas of southern Europe, so called refugias. The two other habitable areas were home for Indo-European and the Basque languages. According to this theory the Fenno-Ugrics spread to the north as ice melted. They populated central and northern Europe, while Basques populated western Europe. Later the Indo-European language speakers presented agriculture to their neughbouring hunter-gatherers. While the Fenno-Ugric and Basque hunter-gatherers learned how to cultivate land they also learned the culture and the language of cultivators, so they became Indo-Europeans. Soon these new Indo-Europeans had population growth caused by agriculture, and they moved to new areas and Indoeuropeanized the local hunter-gatherers, and so on. This is how Celtic, Germanic, Slavic and Baltic languages were born. Finns were not Indo-Europeanized because of their isolated location, and this explains why their language is not related but genes are closely related with Indo-Europeans of central Europe. However, this theory is not accepted by the majority of researchers. It is not easily disproved with archaeological evidence, but many linguistical scientists consider it impossible.

The genetic research points out that the Finns are most related with the Germanic language speakers. According to a wide genetic research the closest group to the Finns are suprisingly the Germanic Flemings of Belgium. It is also remarkable that the similarity is in genes that inherit only from female to female. This suggests that they had common ancestress, probably in the same the late Ice Age refugia. However, the genetic similarity does not necessarily prove that a common language ever existed, or that the common language would have been a Fenno-Ugric one. The Fenno-Ugrian language may have developed and spread only after the Ice Age.

I found this from Wikpedia, 'history of Finland'

Comment about "Mongol looks" (the definition probably being the eye fold, facial proportions?). The following is known:
Most European peoples of today have a certain amount of this look. This becomes apparent when one sees e.g. the Icelandic singer Bj�rk. There needen't be any special gene flow event explaning this (but rather speaks for the genetic homogeneity of all human kind). However, there are a few known recent asiatic genetic flows into Europe: the huns, Mongol + Tatar invasion of Russia and the following westernward migrations and the Ottoman Empire are examples.
In eastern Europe there's even a more recent source of a "mongol look": the Tatars who came/were transported to the shores of the Baltic sea during the 19th century (e.g. Tatars who laboured in Suomenlinna/Sveaborg as Russians made their own fortifications there). The model Ninja Sarasalo is an example. I'm not sure if the frequency of a "mongol look" is higher in Estonia, Finland or Sapmi than in any other comparable European country. Perhaps there IS, however, a distinct "Fennic" look to these people?
No-one knows what the peoples of the Venekirves kultuur looked like. By theway, is this the same as the Battle-axe culture which in Finland traditionally has been associated with the arrival of the Indo-european speakers? Or does it belong to the earlier comb ceramic cultures of the Baltic which are associated with a Finno-Ugric language?

Well, in my history book, i have two pics, one of a man from venekirves culture, and the other from the kammkeraamika culture, the kammkeraamika guy was all Mongoloid looking and the later immigrated venekirves culture guy was quite European looking.

I will revise my history book to see what i can get on the cultures.

Spam


Edited by Cywr

I have no idea, but there are two pictures of sculptures of men of that time.

What, kalevipoeg? Your book has photos of sculptures dating to meso/neolithic times found in Estonia? And the sculptures depict asian looking people? Hm?

Originally posted by Cevlakohn PIE ........... Germanic p, t, k ------> f, �, x b, d, g ------> p, t, k bh, dh, gh ---> b, d, g

I've been thinking about something like that myself.. it's simplified though (of course it is, and it should be, because it's a model ), we dont have the � in Dutch and other modern Germanic languages often lack the x in return. I think there are many subrules to this, like

Other Germanic -> Dutch

sk --------------> sx

ju ---------------> ie

So I think by saying k should be x in germanic in that general list is a little bit too much into (Dutch) detail. It's an interesting little list though