Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Nagyfejedelem
Baron
Joined: 19-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 431
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Finland and the Dark Ages Posted: 03-Sep-2005 at 15:50 |
Perhaps I mixed up kuu with kivi...
|
|
Nagyfejedelem
Baron
Joined: 19-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 431
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 03-Sep-2005 at 15:52 |
Kuu-ukko:
'K' or earlier 'keve' mean stone, too.
|
|
HistoryGuy
Pretorian
Joined: 08-Sep-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 193
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Sep-2005 at 13:10 |
Ha Finns som de kan akkurat drar hjem. Jeg er ikke virkelig stor p Finnish folk. De kan akkurat drar ett eller annet sted ellers jeg sier. Jeg tror at de er del av Finno-ugralickulturen, sammen med Huns, i Hungary.
|
هیچ مردی تا به حال به شما درباره خدا گفته.
|
|
Jorsalfar
Shogun
Joined: 08-Jan-2005
Location: Norway
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 205
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Sep-2005 at 16:26 |
Maybe you should write in english
|
|
gerik
Knight
Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 11:30 |
Without written or archielogical evidence it is hard to assume anything.
I think the distant past or history of the so cald finno-ugric people is
obscure,the exception are the hungarians. By the way in a way it is
incorrect to speak about finno-ugric people because finno-ugrism
is a language theory, a highly controversial one.
Edited by gerik
|
|
Kuu-ukko
Shogun
Joined: 02-Dec-2004
Location: Finland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 204
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:49 |
What is so controversial about it?
|
|
gerik
Knight
Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Sep-2005 at 05:28 |
The conducted genetical research proved that no genetical relationship
exists with finns,estionians or other finno-ugric people (even with
mansis or hansis). This is true also for the hungarians at the time of
conquest. Antropologically they were similar to people of turkish
origin.
Even the Finno-Ugrian language theory underdetermines. It fails to isolate any
lexical parallels that are valid only in the case of the Finno-Ugrian
languages, but that leave out other Eurasian languages out such as the
Altaic languages, the Turkish, the Mongolian, the Sumerian, etc.
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Sep-2005 at 10:01 |
Originally posted by gerik
The conducted genetical research proved that no genetical relationship
exists with finns,estionians or other finno-ugric people (even with
mansis or hansis). This is true also for the hungarians at the time of
conquest. Antropologically they were similar to people of turkish
origin. |
Genetics and lingusitic have nothing to do. They may be parallel or
not. Just look at English-Speaking Jamaicans and compare their genetics
with English-Speaking from London, Sydney or New Delhi.
Even the Finno-Ugrian language theory underdetermines. It fails to isolate any
lexical parallels that are valid only in the case of the Finno-Ugrian
languages, but that leave out other Eurasian languages out such as the
Altaic languages, the Turkish, the Mongolian, the Sumerian, etc. |
That's interesting. It's he first time I read a direct attack to the
Finno-Ugric theory. Can you link to a paper explaining why? (I've found
a paper attacking one that attacks the Uralic or Finno-Ugric family, but nothing against it, much less something solid).
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Kuu-ukko
Shogun
Joined: 02-Dec-2004
Location: Finland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 204
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Sep-2005 at 10:59 |
gerik, please!
Originally posted by gerik
The conducted genetical research proved that no genetical relationship
exists with finns,estionians or other finno-ugric people (even with
mansis or hansis). This is true also for the hungarians at the time of
conquest. Antropologically they were similar to people of turkish
origin. |
As Maju said, genetics and linguistics are not the same. If an area
changes the language it speaks, it doesn't mean complete annihilation
of the previous inhabitants. Infact, it only requires a minority for an
area to change a language. Only in the near past have there been cases
of ethnic switch aswell (e.g. the Americas).
Also, there are common features throughout the Uralic people in
religion, for example (a huge tree/mountain in the center/edges of the
world holding up the sky, the land was created from mud fetched by a
wood grouse from the bottom of the sea, etc.). Of course the versions
are different, but the cores in the Uralic religions are the same.
Originally posted by gerik
Even the Finno-Ugrian language theory underdetermines. It fails to isolate any
lexical parallels that are valid only in the case of the Finno-Ugrian
languages, but that leave out other Eurasian languages out such as the
Altaic languages, the Turkish, the Mongolian, the Sumerian, etc. |
Linguistics can only reach back to about 6000-7000 years, beyond that
is only guessing. The Uralic, Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic (I believe
they are not from a common proto-language within 7000 years, hence the
differenciation) languages might have had a common ancestor in the very
past, OR the similarities are just an areal feature. Sumerian is known
to be an isolate, that's for sure (but only to about 6000 years ).
|
|
gerik
Knight
Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Sep-2005 at 12:41 |
Yes I can provide some source:
Probably you heard about Angela Marcantonio,lecturer in
General Linguistics at the University of Rome 'La Sapienza',
specialising in Uralic studies.
Some of her papers are:
The Uralic Language
Family: Facts, Myths and Statistics (actually this is a book)
http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/book.asp?ref=0631231706
Editor's summary:
In this detailed survey of Finnish, Hungarian, Lapp and the other
Uralic Languages, Angela Marcantonio shows there is in fact no
scientific evidence to support the belief that they form a genetic
family. If this approach is accepted, this detailed analysis will have
far-reaching consequences for other assumed language families.
|
The "Ugric-Turkic" battle:a critical review, coauthors: Pirjo Nummenaho, Michela Salvagni.
You can find the paper at:
http://www.kirj.ee/esi-l-lu/l37-2-1.pdf
The conclusion of the authors are:
Our first conclusion is, therefore, that the existence and uniqueness of
the Finno-Ugric node was n o t established scientifically and beyond
doubt in the last decades of the 19 Century, as widely propagated and
believed.
Our second conclusion is that, to borrow D. Sinors words, ... Uralic,
Altaic,and Uralo-Altaic comparative linguistics should shake themselves
free from simplistic black and white, yes and no solutions (1988 :
739) and that, therefore, the traditional approach to the Uralic and
Altaic studies clearly demands a much needed revision.
|
This phrases are highly used in hungarian circles.
And there is another event which created senzation in hungarian news but
not only. In 12 -nov-2004 Angela Marcantonio held a lecture at
the University of Amsterdam followed by a debate. As a result of this
debate
the non existance of uralic/finno-ugric language family was
accepted, even by Norval Smith, phonology professor at Department
of Theoretical Linguistics, University of Amsterdam.
http://www.demokrata.hu/node/686
http://www.naput.hu/modules.php?name=News&...article& ; ;sid=788
Edited by gerik
|
|
gerik
Knight
Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Sep-2005 at 12:46 |
Other sources are:
Onother critique of the finno-ugrian theory is Dr. Lszl Marcz a linguist of a Dutch university.
Some of his works:
THE UNTENABILITY OF THE FINNO-UGRIAN THEORY
FROM A LINGUISTIC POINT OF VIEW
http://www.acronet.net/~magyar/english/1997-3/JRNL97B.htm
The Magyar Turning Point; Political Opinions Concerning Central Europe was published in 1995 in the Dutch language
You can find a downloadable abriged MS WORD version of the book in english at:
http://www.hungarian-history.hu/lib/maracz/maracz.zip
Dr. Lszl Marcz is accused unfairly to be nationalist, it is a usual way to discredit people.
The following webpage attacks him in in such a vituperative manner.
It seems the owner of the webpage never read his articles.
http://www.geocities.com/isolintu/voodoo.html
Lszl Marcz
happens to be a decent linguist of a Dutch university and also who shares
anti finno-ugric views.
I quote Lszl Marcz as a good answer:
The pseudo science of Finno-Ugrianizm comprises the following tenets:
1. We dont talk about anything that does not justify the Finno Ugrian theses
2. Anyone who judges the Finno-Ugrianizm can and should be subject to slander
3. Put such words into the mouth of the critic which he never said, and refute this statement.
4. Finno-Ugrianizm possesses the eternal truth.
5. Within Finno-Ugrianizm double standards are permitted.
6. Stating the truth is not allowed
7. The sciento-political background of the theory is a taboo.
|
|
|
gerik
Knight
Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Sep-2005 at 12:51 |
The Uralic Language Family: Facts, Myths and Statistics the book of
Angela Marcantonio received a bad review from Johanna Laakso,a
biased one,it is usual for a mainstream finno-ugrist. Usually they
hardly accept any critique of their views.
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/Johanna.Laakso/am_rev.html
I qoute a main-stream finno-ugrist page in the defence of Angela Marcantonio :
http://lepo.it.da.ut.ee/~lillekas/mainlanguage.html
And last but not least: the Uralist Angela Marcantonio has accomplished
something that her colleagues usually do not engage themselves in.
Namely, she has scrupulously read through all essential Uralic research
works through times. As a result of her activity she noticed in her
book (Marcantonio 2002) that a number of works, belonging to the
Uralistic classics had in the course of time become myths, one way or
another. It means that instead of understanding the actual contents or
nature of the works, certain stereotypical notions about the contents
or nature, far from truthful, have been circulating among Uralistic
researchers. In a number of cases a similar observation is extended
also over what has taken place in the history of Uralistics.
Eventually, the so-called fundamentals of Uralistics have also been
critically addressed. Observing the picture, unfurled by Marcantonio in
her book, one can naturally anticipate that Uralistics is no exception:
to a certain degree a similar fate has struck the sciences researching
other language groups. Besides, the phenomenon is of a much wider scope
than just linguistics or the humanities it is probably characteristic
of scientific activity as a whole and through the ages. The more
welcome it is when, at some instant, someone steps up saying: it is
high time to take an account of the household of our science there
are probably things in the account that have long since disappeared or
that are not useable any longer. In place of some things there is only
a distant memory, often obscured beyond recognition: just nothing but a
myth. And so, Marcantonio has taken an account of the results that may
certainly appear as a very bad surprise to numerous traditional
Uralists.
|
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Sep-2005 at 16:33 |
Thanks, Gerik. Too many links for me to read them all. I was a little
astonished when I found a Hungarian missionary claiming Bantu and
Magyar to be cognates but guess his opinions are not actually relevant.
On Marcantonio's work, the difference seems to be on the structure of
the "Uralo-Altaic" tree (assuming there's something of the kind) and
while the belonging of Magyar to the Fino-Ugric subfamily can be on
stake what this review could be bring eventually would be a renewed
interest for the Uralo-Altaic connection, with Magyar maybe as
paradigmatic of it, am I wrong?
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
gerik
Knight
Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Sep-2005 at 04:28 |
That is correct. Hungarians are the paradigm of finno-ugrist both by language,and culture.
Even the most fundamentalist hungarian finno-ugrist think about the
relation with other finno-ugric languages as very distant,they use the
example of english and hindi. The hungarian language has many similar
features,terms
with languages of turkish origin. Some think that hungarian is as close
to finno-ugric as to turkish. Others think that hungarian is more close
to turkish languages like the following link (it is in hungarian sorry):
http://istvandr.kiszely.hu/ostortenet/index.html
|
|