No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Original Synthetic Article: On The Origin of Salish, Wakashnan, and North Caucasian Languages
Abstract
The following paper represents a comparison between the most stable words in two language unities: 1) Salish-Wakashan (North America) and 2) Lezghian group of the North Caucasian family (North Caucasus). This comparison shows that any word/root from the list of basic words in Salish and/or Wakashan precisely matches the appropriate word/root of Lezghian as well as its proto-form in North Caucasian. Such close similarity clearly shows that the Salish-Wakashan languages of North America are related to the North Caucasian languages. We may add that the North Caucasian languages are older, and phonetically more complex, than Salish-Wakashan languages. This shows that Salish-Wakashan languages may have originated from the North Caucasian languages, which are a part of a larger unity: the Sino-Caucasian, or Dene-Caucasian phylum, or macro-family. Having this in mind, we can ask ourselves, when and where have the ancestors of the people, who now speak Salish and Wakashan languages, separated from North Caucasian languages. In the paper below, we try to show that this may have happenede approximately 5,000 years ago. After this split, the ancestors of the Salish and Wakashan languages started moving to the North-East and reached at the end the North American territory. Someyhing similar has happened with another family that is a part of the Dene-Caucasian phylum: The Yenisseian languages of Siberia are closely related to the Athapascan languages of North America, which presupposes a split between the ancestors of the Yenisseian languages and those of the Athapascan languages at some point in Siberia, after which the ancestors of people, speaking Athapascan languages, migrated to North America.
... Кроме того, в перечнях т. н. глобальных этимологий, составленных Д. Бенгтсоном и М. Руленом [Bengtson, Ruhlen 1994], в реконструкции протоалгонкиновакашской макросемьи, выполненной С. Л. Николаевым [Nikolaev 2017], в материалах В. В. Шеворошкина по сопоставительному анализу праязыков нескольких семей [Shevoroshkin 2008], а также в этимологическом словаре салишских языков А. Кёйперса [Kuipers 2002] встречаются синкретичные формы, обозначающие соматизмы и связанные с ними действия. Диффузность семантики этих основ также в определенной степени ставит под сомнение гипотезу о субстантивах как источниках для появления ЛС. ...
... • ГЛАЗ: 'глаз, видеть, смотреть' [Nikolaev 2017: 257;Shevoroshkin 2008: 117]; • РУКА: 'рука, палец, давать, брать, показывать' [Bengtson, Ruhlen 1994: 322;Kuipers 2002: 106-107]; • РОТ: 'рот, говорить' [Kuipers 2002: 203]; • НОС: 'нос, пахнуть, сморкаться' [Bengtson, Ruhlen 1994: 296;Kuipers 2002: 160-161]; • ГОРЛО: 'горло, глотать' [Kuipers 2002: 232-233]; • ЯЗЫК: 'язык, лизать' [Kuipers 2002: 235;Nikolaev 2017: 272]; • ЗУБ: 'зуб, есть' [Kuipers 2002: 236-237]; • ГОЛОВА: 'голова, говорить' [Kuipers 2002: 208]; • ГРУДЬ: 'грудь, сосать, кормить' [Bengtson, Ruhlen 1994: 308]; • РУКА: 'рука, брать в руки' [Bengtson, Ruhlen 1994: 318]. [Mithun 1997: 361-362], что соматизмы как отдельные лексемы гораздо реже встречаются в текстах на салишских языках в сравнении с ЛС, поскольку участники коммуникации больше заинтересованы событиями и ролью людей в этих событиях, а не указаниями на конкретные части тела коммуникантов или субъектов повествования. ...
Lexical suffixation is an essential feature of the Salish language family. Such suffixes form closed classes of morphemes that express various types of meaning, e.g., somatisms, locatives, natural phenomena, artefacts, phytonyms, etc. Most Salish lexical suffixes are of substantive nature. However, they hardly ever correspond with free forms of substantives, be it synchronically or diachronically. The authors reviewed a number of theories concerning the origin and development of the Salish lexical suffixes. Based on the synchronic and diachronic analysis, they put forward the following hypothesis of the origin of the Salish lexical suffixes. The suffixes stared as a dependent predicative construction, eventually compressed into a morphologically-coherent model according to the following evolution scheme: dependent predication / nominalized predicate → compounding / incorporation → lexical suffix (bound morpheme). Thus, the synchronous Salish substantives are diachronically based on verbal stems with their process semantics. The study adds to the linguistic understanding of the origin of various parts of speech and the borders between substantives and verbs.
It is generally accepted that the human evolutionary history was started insub-Saharan Africa by the emergence of first individuals belonging to our genus Homo. But details of this evolution, particularly those of its last stage relating to the modern man (Homo sapiens sapiens) emergence, represent until now a controversial topic. Confusion and imprecision associated with certain concepts and definitions have accentuated this controversy and therefore helped to curb the progress of the research in this topic. In this paper I present these problems before presenting a new detailed version of the theory of unique and recent origin of modern man. This version designated “Recent out of Yemen” thesis represents a refined grand synthesis in which my advanced hypotheses are brought together with new additional details. First, from an objective definition of modern man and several solid anthropological arguments I have proposed dates, of about 45,000 years ago for the emergence of our species and 20,000 years ago for that of our subspecies. Second, from analyses of basic genetic results I have shown that the southern Arabian Peninsula would be the most probable place of a so recent emergence of modern man. The various elements of my thesis are presented and discussed following an empirical approach, and then summarized in a scenario that represents a new more consistent image of our evolutionary history.
As species, myths are evolving entities. Here, we built phylogenetics trees of a mythological family. The results clearly support low horizontal transmissions (borrowings), Palaeolithic diffusions and punctuated evolution. Additionaly, a probable Palaeolithic version of the story has been reconstructed.
In spite of important anthropological data stored up to date, the recent human evolution is still a subject of great controversy. Here I present a revision of the definition of modern man and an attempt to estimate the date of his emergence within a grand synthesis between rigorous anthropological basic data. The anatomical feature criterion can not be considered as a rigorous criterion for recognizing the real modern man from Homo remains. Such recognition must be done indirectly from analysis of cultural products and, if possible, directly by ancient DNA analysis. During the last 20 000 years period, Homo peoples have shown a first real cultural progress, which reflects strongly their possession of the superior level of the potential intellectual aptitude that marks the definition of modern man. Based on many arguments, I consider that the real modern man, Homo sapiens sapiens, emerged at about 20 000 years ago. Conclusions of this study completed by those that I have previously advanced on the emergence place and the expansion of modern humans show a complete hypothetical scenario on our unique and recent origin. Key words : Definition of our genus and species, Timing of our species and sub-species divergence, Human evolutionary history.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.