What language was spoken in East Asia before Proto-Turkic?Was there a Semitic influence on Proto-Germanic?What language came before Proto-Indo-European?Are all languages related?What did the Greeks and Romans believe about language relationships?Origins of Turkic language family? Alternatives to Altaic?What were the pre-Arabic Turkic words used for greeting?Which Indo European language best preserves the features of Proto Indo-European?If speech language was before written language, isn't non verbal before speech?When was Proto-Italic spoken?From which language was the Finnish word for “language” derived?
How can I support myself financially as a 17 year old with a loan?
Why is `abs()` implemented differently?
If prion is a protein. Why is it not disassembled by the digestive system?
Is there a legal ground for stripping the UK of its UN Veto if Scotland and/or N.Ireland split from the UK?
Would glacier 'trees' be plausible?
Returning the outputs of a nested structure
Do I really need diodes to receive MIDI?
In a vacuum triode, what prevents the grid from acting as another anode?
In a Latex Table, how can I automatically resize cell heights to account for superscripts?
My ID is expired, can I fly to the Bahamas with my passport?
Why is Arya visibly scared in the library in S8E3?
Accidentally deleted the "/usr/share" folder
Junior developer struggles: how to communicate with management?
If Earth is tilted, why is Polaris always above the same spot?
Enumerate Derangements
Upside-Down Pyramid Addition...REVERSED!
Theorem won't go to multiple lines and is causing text to run off the page
Did we get closer to another plane than we were supposed to, or was the pilot just protecting our delicate sensibilities?
Which industry am I working in? Software development or financial services?
How to improve/restore vintage Peugeot bike, or is it even worth it?
What happens to matryoshka Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansions?
A non-technological, repeating, phenomenon in the sky, holding its position in the sky for hours
Sub query result is 0
Catholic vs Protestant Support for Nazism in Germany
What language was spoken in East Asia before Proto-Turkic?
Was there a Semitic influence on Proto-Germanic?What language came before Proto-Indo-European?Are all languages related?What did the Greeks and Romans believe about language relationships?Origins of Turkic language family? Alternatives to Altaic?What were the pre-Arabic Turkic words used for greeting?Which Indo European language best preserves the features of Proto Indo-European?If speech language was before written language, isn't non verbal before speech?When was Proto-Italic spoken?From which language was the Finnish word for “language” derived?
From Wikipedia we have:
The Proto-Turkic language is the linguistic reconstruction of the
common ancestor of the Turkic languages that was spoken by the
Proto-Turks before their divergence into the various Turkic peoples.
Proto-Turkic separated into Oghur (western) and Common Turkic
(eastern) branches. One estimate postulates Proto-Turkic to have been
spoken 2,500 years ago in East Asia.
- Which language did the ancestors of Proto-Turks speak?
- If they spoke scythian (an Iranian language) then why did they shift
to proto-Turkic? - Notice that I'm not questioning assimilation done by a nomadic group
to other groups, I'm questioning about the very first beginning of a
new language family. A new language family does not pop up through Spontaneous generation in vacuum. How do linguists and anthropologists explain it?
historical-linguistics indo-european language-families turkic-languages indo-aryan
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
New contributor
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
From Wikipedia we have:
The Proto-Turkic language is the linguistic reconstruction of the
common ancestor of the Turkic languages that was spoken by the
Proto-Turks before their divergence into the various Turkic peoples.
Proto-Turkic separated into Oghur (western) and Common Turkic
(eastern) branches. One estimate postulates Proto-Turkic to have been
spoken 2,500 years ago in East Asia.
- Which language did the ancestors of Proto-Turks speak?
- If they spoke scythian (an Iranian language) then why did they shift
to proto-Turkic? - Notice that I'm not questioning assimilation done by a nomadic group
to other groups, I'm questioning about the very first beginning of a
new language family. A new language family does not pop up through Spontaneous generation in vacuum. How do linguists and anthropologists explain it?
historical-linguistics indo-european language-families turkic-languages indo-aryan
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
New contributor
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
2
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08
add a comment |
From Wikipedia we have:
The Proto-Turkic language is the linguistic reconstruction of the
common ancestor of the Turkic languages that was spoken by the
Proto-Turks before their divergence into the various Turkic peoples.
Proto-Turkic separated into Oghur (western) and Common Turkic
(eastern) branches. One estimate postulates Proto-Turkic to have been
spoken 2,500 years ago in East Asia.
- Which language did the ancestors of Proto-Turks speak?
- If they spoke scythian (an Iranian language) then why did they shift
to proto-Turkic? - Notice that I'm not questioning assimilation done by a nomadic group
to other groups, I'm questioning about the very first beginning of a
new language family. A new language family does not pop up through Spontaneous generation in vacuum. How do linguists and anthropologists explain it?
historical-linguistics indo-european language-families turkic-languages indo-aryan
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
New contributor
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
From Wikipedia we have:
The Proto-Turkic language is the linguistic reconstruction of the
common ancestor of the Turkic languages that was spoken by the
Proto-Turks before their divergence into the various Turkic peoples.
Proto-Turkic separated into Oghur (western) and Common Turkic
(eastern) branches. One estimate postulates Proto-Turkic to have been
spoken 2,500 years ago in East Asia.
- Which language did the ancestors of Proto-Turks speak?
- If they spoke scythian (an Iranian language) then why did they shift
to proto-Turkic? - Notice that I'm not questioning assimilation done by a nomadic group
to other groups, I'm questioning about the very first beginning of a
new language family. A new language family does not pop up through Spontaneous generation in vacuum. How do linguists and anthropologists explain it?
historical-linguistics indo-european language-families turkic-languages indo-aryan
historical-linguistics indo-european language-families turkic-languages indo-aryan
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
New contributor
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
New contributor
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
New contributor
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
asked Apr 27 at 15:12
Sepideh AbadppourSepideh Abadppour
1212
1212
New contributor
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
2
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08
add a comment |
1
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
2
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08
1
1
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
2
2
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
As for the title question, the answer would be "many languages, including proto-Chinese". Focusing on the question in the body, the language spoken by the historical ancestors of proto-Turks, there are two main options. One is that they spoke "pre-proto-Turkic", that is, an undocumented language whose properties are not presently recoverable. As for the name of that language, just as we don't know what ethnonym the proto-Indo-Europeans had for themselves (or the proto-Turks), we don't know what name the 10-generation before ancestors of the Turks or Indo-Europeans had for themselves. I should point out that there has been a theory that Mongolian, Tungusic and Turkic are themselves derives from an Altaic proto-language, but that hypothesis is now rejected by most linguists working in the area. Still, it could turn out that there actually is some unproven relationship between Turkic and some other language group.
An alternative would be that the individuals who constitute the majority of the speakers of the language reconstructable as "proto-Turkic" descended from people who switched languages from something else to proto-Turkic. For example, perhaps those people were Scythians, but for some political reason switched language to proto-Turkic. This has happened many times in world history, for example the ancestors of current Arabic speakers in a number of countries originally spoke Nilo-Saharan or Berber languages (among others), but for political reasons adopted Arabic. But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario, lacking in compelling historical support in the present case.
So the answer would be "pre-proto-Turkic", which means "whatever language preceded proto-Turkic". No new language family was started, instead, "proto-Turkic" refers to the limit of our ability to reconstruct languages. It may be sensible to talk of new families when dealing with daughter languages of a credible proto-language, such as Germanic or Italic in relation to Indo-European where we can say that the properties of PIE changed one way to give Proto-Germanic vs. another way to give proto-Italic. Until we find evidence of some lost sister of proto-Turkic, we have no reason to speak of "developing a new language family".
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.7k12471
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
2 days ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "312"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31277%2fwhat-language-was-spoken-in-east-asia-before-proto-turkic%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
As for the title question, the answer would be "many languages, including proto-Chinese". Focusing on the question in the body, the language spoken by the historical ancestors of proto-Turks, there are two main options. One is that they spoke "pre-proto-Turkic", that is, an undocumented language whose properties are not presently recoverable. As for the name of that language, just as we don't know what ethnonym the proto-Indo-Europeans had for themselves (or the proto-Turks), we don't know what name the 10-generation before ancestors of the Turks or Indo-Europeans had for themselves. I should point out that there has been a theory that Mongolian, Tungusic and Turkic are themselves derives from an Altaic proto-language, but that hypothesis is now rejected by most linguists working in the area. Still, it could turn out that there actually is some unproven relationship between Turkic and some other language group.
An alternative would be that the individuals who constitute the majority of the speakers of the language reconstructable as "proto-Turkic" descended from people who switched languages from something else to proto-Turkic. For example, perhaps those people were Scythians, but for some political reason switched language to proto-Turkic. This has happened many times in world history, for example the ancestors of current Arabic speakers in a number of countries originally spoke Nilo-Saharan or Berber languages (among others), but for political reasons adopted Arabic. But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario, lacking in compelling historical support in the present case.
So the answer would be "pre-proto-Turkic", which means "whatever language preceded proto-Turkic". No new language family was started, instead, "proto-Turkic" refers to the limit of our ability to reconstruct languages. It may be sensible to talk of new families when dealing with daughter languages of a credible proto-language, such as Germanic or Italic in relation to Indo-European where we can say that the properties of PIE changed one way to give Proto-Germanic vs. another way to give proto-Italic. Until we find evidence of some lost sister of proto-Turkic, we have no reason to speak of "developing a new language family".
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.7k12471
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
2 days ago
add a comment |
As for the title question, the answer would be "many languages, including proto-Chinese". Focusing on the question in the body, the language spoken by the historical ancestors of proto-Turks, there are two main options. One is that they spoke "pre-proto-Turkic", that is, an undocumented language whose properties are not presently recoverable. As for the name of that language, just as we don't know what ethnonym the proto-Indo-Europeans had for themselves (or the proto-Turks), we don't know what name the 10-generation before ancestors of the Turks or Indo-Europeans had for themselves. I should point out that there has been a theory that Mongolian, Tungusic and Turkic are themselves derives from an Altaic proto-language, but that hypothesis is now rejected by most linguists working in the area. Still, it could turn out that there actually is some unproven relationship between Turkic and some other language group.
An alternative would be that the individuals who constitute the majority of the speakers of the language reconstructable as "proto-Turkic" descended from people who switched languages from something else to proto-Turkic. For example, perhaps those people were Scythians, but for some political reason switched language to proto-Turkic. This has happened many times in world history, for example the ancestors of current Arabic speakers in a number of countries originally spoke Nilo-Saharan or Berber languages (among others), but for political reasons adopted Arabic. But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario, lacking in compelling historical support in the present case.
So the answer would be "pre-proto-Turkic", which means "whatever language preceded proto-Turkic". No new language family was started, instead, "proto-Turkic" refers to the limit of our ability to reconstruct languages. It may be sensible to talk of new families when dealing with daughter languages of a credible proto-language, such as Germanic or Italic in relation to Indo-European where we can say that the properties of PIE changed one way to give Proto-Germanic vs. another way to give proto-Italic. Until we find evidence of some lost sister of proto-Turkic, we have no reason to speak of "developing a new language family".
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.7k12471
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
2 days ago
add a comment |
As for the title question, the answer would be "many languages, including proto-Chinese". Focusing on the question in the body, the language spoken by the historical ancestors of proto-Turks, there are two main options. One is that they spoke "pre-proto-Turkic", that is, an undocumented language whose properties are not presently recoverable. As for the name of that language, just as we don't know what ethnonym the proto-Indo-Europeans had for themselves (or the proto-Turks), we don't know what name the 10-generation before ancestors of the Turks or Indo-Europeans had for themselves. I should point out that there has been a theory that Mongolian, Tungusic and Turkic are themselves derives from an Altaic proto-language, but that hypothesis is now rejected by most linguists working in the area. Still, it could turn out that there actually is some unproven relationship between Turkic and some other language group.
An alternative would be that the individuals who constitute the majority of the speakers of the language reconstructable as "proto-Turkic" descended from people who switched languages from something else to proto-Turkic. For example, perhaps those people were Scythians, but for some political reason switched language to proto-Turkic. This has happened many times in world history, for example the ancestors of current Arabic speakers in a number of countries originally spoke Nilo-Saharan or Berber languages (among others), but for political reasons adopted Arabic. But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario, lacking in compelling historical support in the present case.
So the answer would be "pre-proto-Turkic", which means "whatever language preceded proto-Turkic". No new language family was started, instead, "proto-Turkic" refers to the limit of our ability to reconstruct languages. It may be sensible to talk of new families when dealing with daughter languages of a credible proto-language, such as Germanic or Italic in relation to Indo-European where we can say that the properties of PIE changed one way to give Proto-Germanic vs. another way to give proto-Italic. Until we find evidence of some lost sister of proto-Turkic, we have no reason to speak of "developing a new language family".
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.7k12471
As for the title question, the answer would be "many languages, including proto-Chinese". Focusing on the question in the body, the language spoken by the historical ancestors of proto-Turks, there are two main options. One is that they spoke "pre-proto-Turkic", that is, an undocumented language whose properties are not presently recoverable. As for the name of that language, just as we don't know what ethnonym the proto-Indo-Europeans had for themselves (or the proto-Turks), we don't know what name the 10-generation before ancestors of the Turks or Indo-Europeans had for themselves. I should point out that there has been a theory that Mongolian, Tungusic and Turkic are themselves derives from an Altaic proto-language, but that hypothesis is now rejected by most linguists working in the area. Still, it could turn out that there actually is some unproven relationship between Turkic and some other language group.
An alternative would be that the individuals who constitute the majority of the speakers of the language reconstructable as "proto-Turkic" descended from people who switched languages from something else to proto-Turkic. For example, perhaps those people were Scythians, but for some political reason switched language to proto-Turkic. This has happened many times in world history, for example the ancestors of current Arabic speakers in a number of countries originally spoke Nilo-Saharan or Berber languages (among others), but for political reasons adopted Arabic. But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario, lacking in compelling historical support in the present case.
So the answer would be "pre-proto-Turkic", which means "whatever language preceded proto-Turkic". No new language family was started, instead, "proto-Turkic" refers to the limit of our ability to reconstruct languages. It may be sensible to talk of new families when dealing with daughter languages of a credible proto-language, such as Germanic or Italic in relation to Indo-European where we can say that the properties of PIE changed one way to give Proto-Germanic vs. another way to give proto-Italic. Until we find evidence of some lost sister of proto-Turkic, we have no reason to speak of "developing a new language family".
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.7k12471
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.7k12471
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.7k12471
answered Apr 27 at 16:04
user6726user6726
36.7k12471
36.7k12471
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
2 days ago
add a comment |
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
2 days ago
3
3
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
In fact this question arises for every language family. For example assuming that proto-indo-european was spoken near 4500 BC, one may ask how does this proto-language came to existence?
– Sepideh Abadppour
Apr 27 at 16:20
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
2 days ago
You say in one sentence, that there's historical precedence for a fact, and claim in the next that there's no historical support. That sounds dismissive, though it can be recovered. "It lacks ..." substance, a tangible origin theory, specificity, archaeological evidence. I'm really not sure to say it politely. It's enough to say "But this is simply an imaginable alternative scenario" and that just repeats the first word of the paragraph, so it can be removed, too.
– vectory
2 days ago
add a comment |
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sepideh Abadppour is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Linguistics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31277%2fwhat-language-was-spoken-in-east-asia-before-proto-turkic%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
The final question here is on the origin of language, whether language happened once but the branches evolved beyond recognition, or independently. And it is the subject of a grand debate. And there are so very good summaries of it in this SE.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:05
2
The date -2500 is given to set a date for the start of the divergence, that is, it marks the end of proto-X.
– Adam Bittlingmayer
Apr 27 at 18:08