Tuesday, 3 September 2013

Austronesian-Ongan Languages

Since I posted recently about a paper by Juliette Blevins potentially linking Malay semangat and its various Indonesian cognates with proto-Oceanic *manaq through the notion of ancestral power (amongst other things), I thought I'd highlight this paper in Oceanic Linguistics from 2007 in which Blevins attempted to demonstrate a connection between proto-Austronesian and proto-Ongan, the reconstructed ancestor of Jarawa and Onge, languages spoken in the Andaman Islands in the Bay of Bengal.  The islands are fairly near Sumatera, but this isn't a case of Malayo-Polynesian languages having shifted to Andaman from Indonesia in late prehistory or something like that.  The connection is with proto-Austronesian, which is believed to be about 5,500 years old or so.  Wiki also has a brief summary of the arguments.

If this is a viable link, how does it fit into our understanding of southeast Asian prehistory?  That's the big question.  And what does it mean for the link between farming and migration proposed by Peter Bellwood?

Speaking of Bellwood, he has recently published a new book, First Migrants (Wiley-Blackwell 2013), to follow up on his earlier First Farmers.  The themes seem to be the same in both books - First Farmers was, at least in part, about migration and language, which is also dealt with in First Migrants.  I've read the earlier work, but I've only leafed through First Migrants.  It seems that Bellwood continues to uphold the nonsensical and false idea that Indo-European was spread into Europe by the first farmers in the region (alongside the even sillier notion that the first farmers in India were Indo-European speakers as well), and I don't think he has much of use to say about Pama-Nyungan.  But his writing is good - quite forceful - and he's such a knowledgeable chap on these topics that, even though I believe he is wrong about a great deal of things, he shouldn't be ignored.

9 comments:

  1. These populations arrived well before 5,500 years ago. The negrito Andaman and Nicobar Islanders belong to M130 (Haplogroup C) designated by Spencer Wells, who leads the Genographic Project. They are traced by the Y-chromosome. This lineage of peoples migrated between 70,000 and 50,000 years ago from Africa, traveling along the coastlines and eventually arriving in southern India.

    The Onges and Jarawas belong to Haplotype D, a subtype of Haplogroup C, which is also common in Tibet and Japan.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The original population of Andaman was, of course, present on the islands much earlier than the Austronesian language family. Proto-Austronesian is most commonly believed to have been spoken on Taiwan c. 3500 BCE.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The genes and the language are different, and so the proposed connection between Ongan and Austronesian languages does not equate to Austronesian having entered southeast Asia - or even having existed - before the fourth millennium BCE.

    ReplyDelete
  4. proto-austronesians were original from myanmar(but today's burmesians are a new mix of many groups.....even the south burma sea-nomads are not so close to the proto-austronesians). austronesian language is related to indo-european. they were a long time ago neighbours (bangladesh). the proto-indoeuropeans lived original in north-india 20 000 years ago and spread to the north (hindukush, pamir ect.), but the indo-aryans came much later from uzbekistan to india. the elamitic & dravidic languages are also related to proto-indoeuropean, but from an other side; also dravidians are not autochtonic in india, they came at least from balochistan, but they were probably also mixed with iraqis, anyway, indians of today has mixed genetics mixed with middle eastern imigrants (dravidians from iran/west-pakistan, iraq/kuwait (first farmers?) & arabia)

    ReplyDelete
  5. here is the proov that indoeuropean and austronesian languages are related - a word-list of english(1), austronesian(2), russian(3) words:
    mouth, ŋusu/ŋutu, usta
    breast, susu, siska
    head, qulu, golova
    skin, kuli, koja
    blood, daRaq, krov'
    red, meRaq, krasno
    dog, soan/su/asuk, sobaka
    yellow, felo, jeltoe
    honey, madu, myod
    cat, kucing, koshka
    one, asa/isya/ita/eso/esang/usa/ukan/juon, odno
    two, duha/duwe/tswa/tuwa/dua/adwa/duwo, dva
    three, teru/tuyu/tlu/tu/turu/tru, tri
    four, faa/spac/hat/fat/fatra, chetyri
    five, gangsa/hase/pae, pyat'
    six, jawtn/katur, shest'
    seven, hifu, sem'
    eight, hutus/ualu/va'u/voyu/hafa, vosem'
    nine, siyam/hiva/sivak/civa/eiva/chevay, devyat'
    ten, tini/tewina/tane/dasa/masan, desyat'
    be dead, mate/matay, mertvyy
    to think, dem/manatu, dumat' (mnenie=opinion)
    to sew, saqit, seyit'
    to fly, layap/lele, letat'
    to cleave, kalai, kolot'
    water, wai, voda
    gold, koulu, zoloto
    road, dala/jalang/daean, doroga
    day, kdaw/aldaw/atew/adlaw/hani/dina, den'
    new, anyar/hoyu/bawu/nuebu, novyy
    we, mi/kami, my
    i, iaku/ako, ya (oldrussian: yaz)
    what, anto/hyafa/saida/tedu, chto
    fire, ahi/asi/ofih, ogon'
    how, kuja, kak
    to blow, put, dut'
    dark, dem, temno
    then, tiqe, togda
    sky, neno, nebo
    earth, pah, zemlya (pahanie=earth-work)
    person, tawo/tolay, chelovek (telo/tulovische=body)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indoeuropean or actually Denisovan related language?

      The Andamanese, Ainu and Tibetans share DNA Haplotype D.

      In 2014 it is revealed that Tibetans have Denisovan(-like) DNA.
      Link: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v512/n7513/full/nature13408.html

      The Saisiyat; an aboriginal people of Taiwan (so-called homeland of Austronesians); claim to be the first original people to have entered Taiwan.
      Their traditional homeland was near the shores before they were forced away (other people from mainland East Asia?) deep into the mountains.
      Here they encountered a race of short, dark skinned people, the Da'ai (Ta'ay).
      The Da'ai teached the Saisiyat how to live and survive in the mountains and shared their knowledge; including agriculture.

      There are numerous aboriginal Taiwanese people (tribes) who claim that short, dark skinned people once lived in Taiwan; even among them.

      Links Saisyiat legends:
      http://journal.fulbright.org.tw/index.php/browse-topics/new-cultural-insights/item/158-contemporary-aboriginal-the-mixing

      http://plutoandsquid.blogspot.com/2015/08/myths-and-legends-origins-of-pastaai.html

      Who were these short, dark skinned people in Taiwan? Were they actually related to negritos in the Philippines, Malaysia and Andaman islands?
      If so; could it be that the Austronesian language is actually a hybrid (creole-)language to begin with?

      (Human Migration Researcher)

      Delete
    2. hi, i googled the ta'ay people & the story about them was interessting, but i don't understand why you link the denisovans with indoeuropean or austronesian languages?! people of today speak homo sapiens languages no matter if many are partly mixed with the late homo heidelbergensis or homo erectus or homo pekinensis forms of humas like denisovans, neanderthals, homo javaensis ect. by the way the mayority of africans is Party mixed with african homo erectus forms, but a part of west-african tribal population are 100% homo sapiens, their faces are not the same as the stereotype 100%ly negroids looking ones, while europeans and middle-easterners and asians and aboriginees ect are Party mixed with local neandertalensis/denisovaensis/heidelbergensis/georgicus, some more some lesser, you can see it in the australian aboriginees who defently came from india to australia and mixed on the way with homo javaensis, you can see that one part of them are mixed with this human forms, but another part have the non-mixed type like and looked like native india homo sapiens non-mixed people (south india tribals old sapiens type from 40 000 years ago). so i say that i believe in race-distance-points a.k.a. typicalness-distance instead of in real races, party there is much in different people that goes back to homo erectus, but that goes not for everyone, some are more mixed with that some are more mixed with this, peoples are not of 100% type, all These haplogroups shows it, that's really true: people that have the haplogroup I have nothing to do with people that carries the haplogroup R, but a nation like russians for example can have 20% I, 20% N, 50% R & 10% other haplogroups (mainly G), that shows the different origins of the people inside the nation and that goes also for other peoples (europeans, indians, asian,s ect). the I haplogroup people are the proto-oldeuropeans/proto-semites people, because they came both from the proto- haplogroup IJ, yes oldeuropeans have other origins and are other people than indoeuropeans this is clear, the same goes for the people with haplogroup N, they are the proto-fino-ugrics. today europeans are mainly a mix of these groups. the origin place of the I-haplogrup-people is in the region lebanon/jordania/palestina, 40 000 years ago they came to europe and splitted from the J-haplogroup-people a.k.a. prehistoric ancestors of proto-semites; while the indo-europeans came to europe (most eastern europe/tatarstan/volga river regions) not earlier than 10 000 years ago & their ancestors lived once in north-india, the place where the original old haplogroup R*,R1*(R1a*),R2* you can find at most, while cordered-ware-culture-people are only 25% indoeuropean they were mixed with the local Population and they had the late mutation haplogroup version R1a1a1a1 or so(from the father of the father). something about the topic proto-austronesians: i can give you a garanty that the "so called" representants of austronesians, the taiwanese people, are defently not more of austronesian descent than burmesians, even if the burmesians don't speak a austronesian language, still they arecloser to the proto-austronesians, but of course not every one of the burmesins (not 100%ly) but anyway taiwanesian dialects are not the ones who are more closer related than any other austronesian languages, the proto-austronesians were from myanmar/burma and were related to indoeuropeans and they were their neighbour, they were not from east-asia, they were native to burma to bangladesh. if some austronesian languages have words that are closer to other east-asian languages then that means the are mixed with theese groups, beacuse indoeuropean is only related to austronesian and not to austroasiatic and other ocean or how this created makro-language-group is called

      Delete
    3. i don't read my text before i published it, so i have to correct some things:
      *east-africa tribal population (not west-african)
      *partly (not party)
      *taiwanesian dialects are not the ones which are closer to indoeuropean than many other austronesian languages
      *native to burma close to bangladesh

      Delete
  6. here is a picture-link of 3 austronesian girls who might be represent the proto-austronesian type: http://www.directupload.net/file/d/4479/cb35qkeo_png.htm

    ReplyDelete

You can post anonymously if you really want to, but I would appreciate it if you could provide some means of identifying who you are, if only for the purpose of knowing who has written what.