Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Finland and the Dark Ages

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Nagyfejedelem View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 19-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 431
  Quote Nagyfejedelem Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Finland and the Dark Ages
    Posted: 03-Sep-2005 at 15:50
Perhaps I mixed up kuu with kivi...
Back to Top
Nagyfejedelem View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 19-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 431
  Quote Nagyfejedelem Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Sep-2005 at 15:52

Kuu-ukko:

'K' or earlier 'keve' mean stone, too.

Back to Top
HistoryGuy View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Sep-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 193
  Quote HistoryGuy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.
Back to Top
Jorsalfar View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jan-2005
Location: Norway
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 205
  Quote Jorsalfar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2005 at 16:26

Maybe you should write in english

 

Back to Top
gerik View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
  Quote gerik Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
Kuu-ukko View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 02-Dec-2004
Location: Finland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 204
  Quote Kuu-ukko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:49
What is so controversial about it?
Back to Top
gerik View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
  Quote gerik Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.



Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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!
Back to Top
Kuu-ukko View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 02-Dec-2004
Location: Finland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 204
  Quote Kuu-ukko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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 ).
Back to Top
gerik View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
  Quote gerik Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Sep-2005 at 12:41
Originally posted by Maju



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).



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
Back to Top
gerik View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
  Quote gerik Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.

Back to Top
gerik View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
  Quote gerik Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.
Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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!
Back to Top
gerik View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 31-Aug-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
  Quote gerik Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.