124018396
03
01
01
JB code
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
Z 215 GE
15
9789027264640
06
10.1075/z.215
13
2018036512
00
EA
E133
10
01
JB code
Z
02
215.00
01
02
Not in series
Not in series
01
01
Language Dispersal Beyond Farming
Language Dispersal Beyond Farming
1
B01
01
JB code
667284991
Martine Robbeets
Robbeets, Martine
Martine
Robbeets
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
2
B01
01
JB code
978297137
Alexander Savelyev
Savelyev, Alexander
Alexander
Savelyev
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
01
eng
11
338
03
03
xiii
03
00
324
03
24
JB code
LIN.ANTHR
Anthropological Linguistics
24
JB code
LIN.EVO
Evolution of language
24
JB code
LIN.HL
Historical linguistics
24
JB code
LIN.THEOR
Theoretical linguistics
10
LAN009010
12
CFF
01
06
03
00
Why do some languages wither and die, while others prosper and spread? Around the turn of the millennium a number of archaeologists such as Colin Renfrew and Peter Bellwood made the controversial claim that many of the world’s major language families owe their dispersal to the adoption of agriculture by their early speakers. In this volume, their proposal is reassessed by linguists, investigating to what extent the economic dependence on plant cultivation really impacted language spread in various parts of the world. Special attention is paid to "tricky" language families such as Eskimo-Aleut, Quechua, Aymara, Bantu, Indo-European, Transeurasian, Turkic, Japano-Koreanic, Hmong-Mien and Trans-New Guinea, that cannot unequivocally be regarded as instances of Farming/Language Dispersal, even if subsistence played a role in their expansion.
01
00
03
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/z.215.png
01
01
D502
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027212559.jpg
01
01
D504
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027212559.tif
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/z.215.hb.png
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/z.215.png
02
00
03
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/z.215.hb.png
03
00
03
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/z.215.hb.png
01
01
JB code
z.215.lot
06
10.1075/z.215.lot
vii
viii
2
Miscellaneous
1
01
04
List of tables
List of tables
01
01
JB code
z.215.lof
06
10.1075/z.215.lof
ix
x
2
Miscellaneous
2
01
04
List of figures
List of figures
01
01
JB code
z.215.loc
06
10.1075/z.215.loc
xi
xii
2
Miscellaneous
3
01
04
List of contributors
List of contributors
01
01
JB code
z.215.ack
06
10.1075/z.215.ack
xiii
xiii
1
Miscellaneous
4
01
04
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements
01
01
JB code
z.215.01rob
06
10.1075/z.215.01rob
1
23
23
Chapter
5
01
04
Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal
Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal
01
04
Food for thought
Food for thought
1
A01
01
JB code
920314391
Martine Robbeets
Robbeets, Martine
Martine
Robbeets
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
01
01
JB code
z.215.02eml
06
10.1075/z.215.02eml
25
45
21
Chapter
6
01
04
Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms
Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms
01
04
Reconstruction and contact patterns
Reconstruction and contact patterns
1
A01
01
JB code
446314392
Nicholas Q. Emlen
Emlen, Nicholas Q.
Nicholas Q.
Emlen
Leiden University Centre for Linguistics
2
A01
01
JB code
663314393
Willem F. H. Adelaar
Adelaar, Willem F. H.
Willem F. H.
Adelaar
Leiden University Centre for Linguistics
01
01
JB code
z.215.03ber
06
10.1075/z.215.03ber
47
73
27
Chapter
7
01
04
Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut)
Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut)
1
A01
01
JB code
237314394
Anna Berge
Berge, Anna
Anna
Berge
Alaska Native Language Center
01
01
JB code
z.215.04fra
06
10.1075/z.215.04fra
75
92
18
Chapter
8
01
04
Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture
Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture
1
A01
01
JB code
159314395
Alexander Francis-Ratte
Francis-Ratte, Alexander
Alexander
Francis-Ratte
Furman University
01
01
JB code
z.215.05rob
06
10.1075/z.215.05rob
93
121
29
Chapter
9
01
04
Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers
Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers
1
A01
01
JB code
129314396
Martine Robbeets
Robbeets, Martine
Martine
Robbeets
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
01
01
JB code
z.215.06sav
06
10.1075/z.215.06sav
123
154
32
Chapter
10
01
04
Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic
Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic
1
A01
01
JB code
169314397
Alexander Savelyev
Savelyev, Alexander
Alexander
Savelyev
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
01
01
JB code
z.215.07sch
06
10.1075/z.215.07sch
155
181
27
Chapter
11
01
04
Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family
Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family
01
04
A
consideration
A consideration
1
A01
01
JB code
71314398
Antoinette Schapper
Schapper, Antoinette
Antoinette
Schapper
KITLV/University of Cologne
01
01
JB code
z.215.08van
06
10.1075/z.215.08van
183
214
32
Chapter
12
01
04
Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice
Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice
1
A01
01
JB code
120314399
George L. Driem
Driem, George L.
George L.
Driem
Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Bern, Switzerland
01
01
JB code
z.215.09sta
06
10.1075/z.215.09sta
215
233
19
Chapter
13
01
04
Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon
Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon
01
04
Problems and perspectives
Problems and perspectives
1
A01
01
JB code
42314400
George Starostin
Starostin, George
George
Starostin
Russian State University for the Humanities/Russian Presidential Academy, Moscow
01
01
JB code
z.215.10bos
06
10.1075/z.215.10bos
235
258
24
Chapter
14
01
04
Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers?
Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers?
01
04
A
first assessment of the linguistic evidence
A first assessment of the linguistic evidence
1
A01
01
JB code
144314401
Koen Bostoen
Bostoen, Koen
Koen
Bostoen
UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent)
2
A01
01
JB code
474314402
Joseph Koni Muluwa
Koni Muluwa, Joseph
Joseph
Koni Muluwa
UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent)
01
01
JB code
z.215.11jos
06
10.1075/z.215.11jos
259
274
16
Chapter
15
01
04
Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal
Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal
1
A01
01
JB code
556314403
Brian D. Joseph
Joseph, Brian D.
Brian D.
Joseph
The Ohio State University
01
01
JB code
z.215.12kum
06
10.1075/z.215.12kum
275
290
16
Chapter
16
01
04
Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian
Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian
1
A01
01
JB code
620314404
Martin Joachim Kümmel
Kümmel, Martin Joachim
Martin Joachim
Kümmel
Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena
01
01
JB code
z.215.13gar
06
10.1075/z.215.13gar
291
311
21
Chapter
17
01
04
Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans
Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans
1
A01
01
JB code
557314405
Romain Garnier
Garnier, Romain
Romain
Garnier
Université de Limoges and Institut Universitaire de France
2
A01
01
JB code
798314406
Laurent Sagart
Sagart, Laurent
Laurent
Sagart
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
3
A01
01
JB code
110314407
Benoît Sagot
Sagot, Benoît
Benoît
Sagot
Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique
01
01
JB code
z.215.ai
06
10.1075/z.215.ai
313
319
7
Miscellaneous
18
01
04
Language index
Language index
01
01
JB code
z.215.si
06
10.1075/z.215.si
321
324
4
Miscellaneous
19
01
04
Subject index
Subject index
01
JB code
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
01
JB code
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
https://benjamins.com
Amsterdam
NL
00
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers
onix@benjamins.nl
04
01
00
20171221
C
2017
John Benjamins
D
2017
John Benjamins
02
WORLD
13
15
9789027212559
WORLD
03
01
JB
17
Google
03
https://play.google.com/store/books
21
01
345017814
03
01
01
JB code
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
Z 215 Eb
15
9789027264640
06
10.1075/z.215
13
2018036512
00
EA
E107
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0
01
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
11
01
JB code
jbe-openaccess
01
02
Open Access Books (ca. 70 titles)
11
01
JB code
jbe-all
01
02
Full EBA collection (ca. 4,200 titles)
11
01
JB code
jbe-2017
01
02
2017 collection (152 titles)
05
02
2017 collection
01
01
Language Dispersal Beyond Farming
Language Dispersal Beyond Farming
1
B01
01
JB code
667284991
Martine Robbeets
Robbeets, Martine
Martine
Robbeets
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/667284991
2
B01
01
JB code
978297137
Alexander Savelyev
Savelyev, Alexander
Alexander
Savelyev
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/978297137
01
eng
11
338
03
03
xiii
03
00
324
03
01
23
417/.7
03
2016
P40.5.L37
04
Language spread--Congresses.
04
Languages in contact--Congresses.
04
Agriculture, Prehistoric--Congresses.
04
Pastoral systems, Prehistoric--Congresses.
04
Anthropologic linguistics--Congresses.
10
LAN009010
12
CFF
24
JB code
LIN.ANTHR
Anthropological Linguistics
24
JB code
LIN.EVO
Evolution of language
24
JB code
LIN.HL
Historical linguistics
24
JB code
LIN.THEOR
Theoretical linguistics
01
06
03
00
Why do some languages wither and die, while others prosper and spread? Around the turn of the millennium a number of archaeologists such as Colin Renfrew and Peter Bellwood made the controversial claim that many of the world’s major language families owe their dispersal to the adoption of agriculture by their early speakers. In this volume, their proposal is reassessed by linguists, investigating to what extent the economic dependence on plant cultivation really impacted language spread in various parts of the world. Special attention is paid to "tricky" language families such as Eskimo-Aleut, Quechua, Aymara, Bantu, Indo-European, Transeurasian, Turkic, Japano-Koreanic, Hmong-Mien and Trans-New Guinea, that cannot unequivocally be regarded as instances of Farming/Language Dispersal, even if subsistence played a role in their expansion.
01
00
03
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/z.215.png
01
01
D502
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027212559.jpg
01
01
D504
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027212559.tif
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/z.215.hb.png
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/z.215.png
02
00
03
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/z.215.hb.png
03
00
03
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/z.215.hb.png
01
01
JB code
z.215.lot
06
10.1075/z.215.lot
vii
viii
2
Miscellaneous
1
01
04
List of tables
List of tables
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.lof
06
10.1075/z.215.lof
ix
x
2
Miscellaneous
2
01
04
List of figures
List of figures
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.loc
06
10.1075/z.215.loc
xi
xii
2
Miscellaneous
3
01
04
List of contributors
List of contributors
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.ack
06
10.1075/z.215.ack
xiii
xiii
1
Miscellaneous
4
01
04
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.01rob
06
10.1075/z.215.01rob
1
23
23
Chapter
5
01
04
Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal
Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal
01
04
Food for thought
Food for thought
1
A01
01
JB code
920314391
Martine Robbeets
Robbeets, Martine
Martine
Robbeets
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/920314391
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.02eml
06
10.1075/z.215.02eml
25
45
21
Chapter
6
01
04
Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms
Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms
01
04
Reconstruction and contact patterns
Reconstruction and contact patterns
1
A01
01
JB code
446314392
Nicholas Q. Emlen
Emlen, Nicholas Q.
Nicholas Q.
Emlen
Leiden University Centre for Linguistics
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/446314392
2
A01
01
JB code
663314393
Willem F. H. Adelaar
Adelaar, Willem F. H.
Willem F. H.
Adelaar
Leiden University Centre for Linguistics
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/663314393
01
eng
30
00
This chapter presents reconstructed Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara lexical items related to cultivation and herding, and draws conclusions about language and subsistence in the ancient Andes. The patterns of lexical borrowing between the two lineages offer a novel empirical perspective on how early Quechuan and Aymaran speakers lived. When the many layers of borrowing are stripped away, it is clear that both were engaged in agropastoral economies before the languages first came into contact. Furthermore, the presence of terms from a wide range of ecological zones, from the high grasslands to (in the case of Quechua) the tropical lowlands, suggests that both languages cross-cut elevations in a manner consistent with the typically Andean system of ecological complementarity.
01
01
JB code
z.215.03ber
06
10.1075/z.215.03ber
47
73
27
Chapter
7
01
04
Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut)
Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut)
1
A01
01
JB code
237314394
Anna Berge
Berge, Anna
Anna
Berge
Alaska Native Language Center
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/237314394
01
eng
30
00
The Eskimo-Aleut are arctic and subarctic hunter-gatherers known for their geographic spread and successful adaptation to a harsh climate; they are one of the canonical examples of a people that spread without agriculture. One of the most prehistoric recent spreads in this language family occurred about 1000 years ago, with effects felt throughout coastal Alaska. One area of language contact and possible spread was in Southeast Alaska, between the Pacific Coast Yupik language Alutiiq and the Aleutian language Unangam Tunuu. In this paper, I look at the distribution of cognates and borrowings of subsistence terminology in Unangam Tunuu, and I show that Alutiiq must have spread into a previously Unangax̂ area as a result of warfare rather than subsistence activities.
01
01
JB code
z.215.04fra
06
10.1075/z.215.04fra
75
92
18
Chapter
8
01
04
Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture
Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture
1
A01
01
JB code
159314395
Alexander Francis-Ratte
Francis-Ratte, Alexander
Alexander
Francis-Ratte
Furman University
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/159314395
01
eng
30
00
Despite the existence of strong cognates in other realms of basic vocabulary, it remains unclear why Korean and Japanese share so few words for grain and agriculture. This paper proposes that pre-rice vocabulary has undergone a process of lexical recycling in Korean to refer to later rice-related practices. The observation that Korean words for ‘rice’ contain initial p suggests common derivations from pre-MK *po ‘rice(?)’ that is relatable to Old Japanese po ‘a grain’. This paper uncovers important Japano-Koreanic cognates, including ‘buckwheat,’ ‘millet,’ and ‘rice plant’. This analysis also shows how linguists may retrieve early agricultural terminology that has been replaced by more advanced practices.
01
01
JB code
z.215.05rob
06
10.1075/z.215.05rob
93
121
29
Chapter
9
01
04
Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers
Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers
1
A01
01
JB code
129314396
Martine Robbeets
Robbeets, Martine
Martine
Robbeets
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/129314396
01
eng
30
00
The Farming Language Dispersal Hypothesis makes the radical and controversial claim that many of the world’s major language families owe their present-day distribution to the adoption of agriculture by their early speakers. Especially for regions such as Northern Asia, where farming is only marginally viable, this claim has been seriously called into question. This paper investigates to what extent agriculture impacted the dispersal of the Transeurasian language family, i.e. the genealogical grouping consisting of the Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Koreanic and Japonic languages. For this purpose, I establish the internal family structure of Transeurasian, reconstruct cultural vocabulary and situate the Transeurasian languages in time and space. Assessing the cultural reconstructions and mapping the tree topology, time-depth and homeland on the demographic transitions visible in the archaeological and genetic record, I find indications that proto-Transeurasian was spoken by people gradually adopting farming and that its dispersal was indeed driven by agriculture.
01
01
JB code
z.215.06sav
06
10.1075/z.215.06sav
123
154
32
Chapter
10
01
04
Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic
Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic
1
A01
01
JB code
169314397
Alexander Savelyev
Savelyev, Alexander
Alexander
Savelyev
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/169314397
01
eng
30
00
Historical sources from different times describe Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic traditional economies as based on pastoralism, with agriculture playing only a minor role among their subsistence strategies. Cultural reconstruction as used by historical linguists may provide additional inferences about the relative importance of farming and pastoralism in these lineages. This paper focuses on the origin of agricultural and pastoralist terms in Proto-Turkic and their parallels in the other branches of Altaic, i.e., Mongolic and Tungusic. I show that the majority of the Turkic pastoralist lexicon has a secondary nature, being formed due to contact, derivation or lexical recycling. At the same time, farming-related terms in Turkic are mostly unborrowed and underived and a few of them have reliable Altaic connections. The very limited number of agricultural terms reconstructible to Proto-Altaic as compared to the preceding Proto-Transeurasian period can be attributed to a loss of farming-related lexicon over time after the break-up of Altaic.
01
01
JB code
z.215.07sch
06
10.1075/z.215.07sch
155
181
27
Chapter
11
01
04
Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family
Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family
01
04
A
consideration
A consideration
1
A01
01
JB code
71314398
Antoinette Schapper
Schapper, Antoinette
Antoinette
Schapper
KITLV/University of Cologne
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/71314398
01
eng
30
00
The island of New Guinea, located to the north of Australia, is one of the world’s major centres of early agriculture and plant domestication. At the same time, a large number of the languages of New Guinea and adjacent areas share a common origin and are believed to belong to a single language family, the Trans-New Guinea family. This paper presents a first attempt to apply the farming-language dispersal hypothesis to the New Guinea case. While the archaeological literature on early agriculture in New Guinea has focused mainly on taro, there is reason to doubt that taro was associated with the Trans-New Guinea expansion. In this paper, I instead consider the role of banana and sugarcane. The occurrence in many Trans-New Guinea languages of related terms for these two crops suggests that these were part of the “farming package” which fuelled the expansion of the family and its speakers.
01
01
JB code
z.215.08van
06
10.1075/z.215.08van
183
214
32
Chapter
12
01
04
Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice
Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice
1
A01
01
JB code
120314399
George L. Driem
Driem, George L.
George L.
Driem
Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Bern, Switzerland
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/120314399
01
eng
30
00
Rice genetics has now provided molecular evidence for three distinct domestications of Asian rice, giving rise to ahu, indica and japonica rice and subsequently involving the multidirectional introgression of favoured alleles between these three families of Oryza sativa cultivars. The phylogeography of Asian wild and cultivated rice species also permits inferences with regard to the likely geographical range within which these three domestication processes involving Asian cultivated rice unfolded. Evidence from linguistic palaeontology permits the identification of two language families whose linguistic ancestors pose the likeliest candidates for the earliest rice domesticators, Austroasiatic and Hmong-Mien. The linguistic arguments and population genetic evidence on Asian rice are assessed. Recent advances in palaeobotany as well as a number of currently prevalent misunderstandings in rice archaeology are discussed. Another set of evidence from linguistic palaeontology involving reconstructible etyma denoting megafauna in light of the early Holocene distribution of these megafaunal species provides a geographical indication for the location of the early Austroasiatic homeland. Furthermore, the molecular genetics of human populations are discussed in order to shed light on the prehistory and geography of the Austroasiatic, Hmong-Mien and other language families. Finally, a synthesis of the disparate sets of evidence is presented.
01
01
JB code
z.215.09sta
06
10.1075/z.215.09sta
215
233
19
Chapter
13
01
04
Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon
Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon
01
04
Problems and perspectives
Problems and perspectives
1
A01
01
JB code
42314400
George Starostin
Starostin, George
George
Starostin
Russian State University for the Humanities/Russian Presidential Academy, Moscow
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/42314400
01
eng
30
00
It is more or less self-evident that the origins of agriculture cannot be directly associated with the ancestral speakers of any of the commonly accepted, non-controversial language families such as Indo-European, Semitic, Dravidian, etc., since these origins go much deeper back in time than any of these ancestral languages. Consequently, in this paper I present a brief overview of some of the most promising, if controversial, hypotheses on deep-level language relationship between various linguistic stocks of Western and Central Eurasia in terms of whether or not there is a chance of reconstructing at least a small amount of agricultural terminology for such hypothetical entities as Proto-Nostratic, Proto-Sino-Caucasian, and Proto-Afroasiatic. The overview leads to the conclusion that some of the most archaic agricultural terminology in the Near East may be associated with the North Caucasian linguistic family and, possibly, also with Basque as its nearest genetic relative; at the same time, evidence of ancient agricultural lexicon in the Afroasiatic stock remains at best circumstantial, whereas evidence from various lineages of “Nostratic” is practically non-existent.
01
01
JB code
z.215.10bos
06
10.1075/z.215.10bos
235
258
24
Chapter
14
01
04
Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers?
Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers?
01
04
A
first assessment of the linguistic evidence
A first assessment of the linguistic evidence
1
A01
01
JB code
144314401
Koen Bostoen
Bostoen, Koen
Koen
Bostoen
UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent)
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/144314401
2
A01
01
JB code
474314402
Joseph Koni Muluwa
Koni Muluwa, Joseph
Joseph
Koni Muluwa
UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent)
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/474314402
01
eng
30
00
Popular belief has it that the Bantu Expansion was a farming/language dispersal. However, there is neither conclusive archaeological nor linguistic evidence to substantiate this hypothesis, especially not for the initial spread in West-Central Africa. In this chapter we consider lexical reconstructions for both domesticated and wild plants in Proto-West-Coastal Bantu associated with the first Bantu speech communities south of the rainforest about 2500 years ago. The possibility to reconstruct terms for five different crops, i.e. pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum), okra (Hibiscus/Abelmoschus esculentus), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata), Bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranea) and plantain (Musa spp.), indicates that by that time Bantu speakers did know how to cultivate plants. At the same time, they still strongly depended on the plant resources that could be collected in their natural environment, as is evidenced by a preliminary assessment of reconstructible names for wild plants. Agriculture in Central Africa was indeed “a slow revolution”, as the late Jan Vansina once proposed, and certainly not the principal motor behind the early Bantu Expansion.
01
01
JB code
z.215.11jos
06
10.1075/z.215.11jos
259
274
16
Chapter
15
01
04
Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal
Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal
1
A01
01
JB code
556314403
Brian D. Joseph
Joseph, Brian D.
Brian D.
Joseph
The Ohio State University
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/556314403
01
eng
30
00
Analysis of agricultural vocabulary remains one of the most compelling methodologies bearing on Renfrew’s Farming/Language Dispersal Hypothesis, by which the reconstructed lexicon for a proto-language of a well-dispersed language family is predicted to contain several agricultural items. Mostly, though, this methodology has involved noting the presence or absence of particular lexical items for a given proto-language and drawing inferences from that, or working out root derivations and drawing appropriate inferences. I propose here two new types of lexically based argument, by way of expanding the methodology of lexical examination and analysis, looking first at derivational processes involved in the creation of relevant words and the meaning that such processes add to the derivative, and then at religious rituals and mythology to examine the embedding of agricultural vocabulary into the religious practices and mythological tales associated with early Indo-European culture. Ultimately, then, I argue that it is not enough to just look at the meanings of particular words and to try to develop a sense of what they originally meant, nor is it enough to determine the source of the words (derivation, etymology). Rather, one also has to look at how the words were used, what is reconstructible about the use and form of the word, and what the cultural context was for the words. Only then can insights derived from lexical examination be used in developing a sense of prehistory.
01
01
JB code
z.215.12kum
06
10.1075/z.215.12kum
275
290
16
Chapter
16
01
04
Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian
Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian
1
A01
01
JB code
620314404
Martin Joachim Kümmel
Kümmel, Martin Joachim
Martin Joachim
Kümmel
Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/620314404
01
eng
30
00
The article investigates the agricultural lexicon of Indo-Iranian, especially its earlier records, and what it may tell us about the spread of farming. After some general remarks on “Neolithic” vocabulary, a short overview of the animal husbandry terminology shows that this field of vocabulary was evidently well-established in Proto-Indo-Iranian, with many cognate terms. Words for cattle, horses, sheep and goats are well developed and mostly inherited, while evidence for pigs is more limited, ad the words for donkey and camel look like common loans. A more extensive discussion of plant terminology reveals that while some generic terms for grain are inherited, more specific words for different kinds of cereals show few inherited terms and/or irregular variation, and the same is even clearer for pulses and some other vegetables. The terminology for agricultural terminology is largely different from that of most European branches of Indo-European. The conclusion is that the cultural background behind these linguistic data points to spreading of a mainly pastoralist culture in the case of Indo-Iranian.
01
01
JB code
z.215.13gar
06
10.1075/z.215.13gar
291
311
21
Chapter
17
01
04
Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans
Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans
1
A01
01
JB code
557314405
Romain Garnier
Garnier, Romain
Romain
Garnier
Université de Limoges and Institut Universitaire de France
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/557314405
2
A01
01
JB code
798314406
Laurent Sagart
Sagart, Laurent
Laurent
Sagart
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/798314406
3
A01
01
JB code
110314407
Benoît Sagot
Sagot, Benoît
Benoît
Sagot
Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/110314407
01
eng
30
00
Recent evidence from archaeology and ancient DNA converge to indicate that the Yamnaya culture, often regarded as the bearer of the Proto-Indo-European language, underwent a strong population expansion in the late 4th and early 3rd millennia BCE. It suggests that the underlying reason for that expansion might be the then unique capacity to digest animal milk in adulthood. We examine the early Indo-European milk-related vocabulary to confirm the special role of animal milk in Indo-European expansions. We show that Proto-Indo-European did not have a specialized root for ‘to milk’ and argue that the IE root *h2melg̑- ‘to milk’ is secondary and post-Anatolian. We take this innovation as an indication of the novelty of animal milking in early Indo-European society. Together with a detailed study of language-specific innovations in this semantic field, we conclude that the ability to digest milk played an important role in boosting Proto-Indo-European demography.
01
01
JB code
z.215.ai
06
10.1075/z.215.ai
313
313
1
Miscellaneous
18
01
04
Language index
Language index
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.si
06
10.1075/z.215.si
321
321
1
Miscellaneous
19
01
04
Subject index
Subject index
01
eng
01
JB code
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
01
JB code
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/z.215
Amsterdam
NL
00
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers
onix@benjamins.nl
04
01
00
20171221
C
2017
John Benjamins
D
2017
John Benjamins
02
WORLD
13
15
9789027212559
WORLD
09
01
JB
3
John Benjamins e-Platform
03
https://jbe-platform.com
29
https://jbe-platform.com/content/books/9789027264640
21
01
973017813
03
01
01
JB code
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
Z 215 Hb
15
9789027212559
06
10.1075/z.215
13
2017041487
00
BB
08
740
gr
01
01
Language Dispersal Beyond Farming
Language Dispersal Beyond Farming
1
B01
01
JB code
667284991
Martine Robbeets
Robbeets, Martine
Martine
Robbeets
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/667284991
2
B01
01
JB code
978297137
Alexander Savelyev
Savelyev, Alexander
Alexander
Savelyev
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/978297137
01
eng
11
338
03
03
xiii
03
00
324
03
01
23
417/.7
03
2016
P40.5.L37
04
Language spread--Congresses.
04
Languages in contact--Congresses.
04
Agriculture, Prehistoric--Congresses.
04
Pastoral systems, Prehistoric--Congresses.
04
Anthropologic linguistics--Congresses.
10
LAN009010
12
CFF
24
JB code
LIN.ANTHR
Anthropological Linguistics
24
JB code
LIN.EVO
Evolution of language
24
JB code
LIN.HL
Historical linguistics
24
JB code
LIN.THEOR
Theoretical linguistics
01
06
03
00
Why do some languages wither and die, while others prosper and spread? Around the turn of the millennium a number of archaeologists such as Colin Renfrew and Peter Bellwood made the controversial claim that many of the world’s major language families owe their dispersal to the adoption of agriculture by their early speakers. In this volume, their proposal is reassessed by linguists, investigating to what extent the economic dependence on plant cultivation really impacted language spread in various parts of the world. Special attention is paid to "tricky" language families such as Eskimo-Aleut, Quechua, Aymara, Bantu, Indo-European, Transeurasian, Turkic, Japano-Koreanic, Hmong-Mien and Trans-New Guinea, that cannot unequivocally be regarded as instances of Farming/Language Dispersal, even if subsistence played a role in their expansion.
01
00
03
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/z.215.png
01
01
D502
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027212559.jpg
01
01
D504
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027212559.tif
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/z.215.hb.png
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/z.215.png
02
00
03
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/z.215.hb.png
03
00
03
01
01
D503
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/z.215.hb.png
01
01
JB code
z.215.lot
06
10.1075/z.215.lot
vii
viii
2
Miscellaneous
1
01
04
List of tables
List of tables
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.lof
06
10.1075/z.215.lof
ix
x
2
Miscellaneous
2
01
04
List of figures
List of figures
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.loc
06
10.1075/z.215.loc
xi
xii
2
Miscellaneous
3
01
04
List of contributors
List of contributors
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.ack
06
10.1075/z.215.ack
xiii
xiii
1
Miscellaneous
4
01
04
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.01rob
06
10.1075/z.215.01rob
1
23
23
Chapter
5
01
04
Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal
Chapter 1. Farming/Language Dispersal
01
04
Food for thought
Food for thought
1
A01
01
JB code
920314391
Martine Robbeets
Robbeets, Martine
Martine
Robbeets
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/920314391
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.02eml
06
10.1075/z.215.02eml
25
45
21
Chapter
6
01
04
Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms
Chapter 2. Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara agropastoral terms
01
04
Reconstruction and contact patterns
Reconstruction and contact patterns
1
A01
01
JB code
446314392
Nicholas Q. Emlen
Emlen, Nicholas Q.
Nicholas Q.
Emlen
Leiden University Centre for Linguistics
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/446314392
2
A01
01
JB code
663314393
Willem F. H. Adelaar
Adelaar, Willem F. H.
Willem F. H.
Adelaar
Leiden University Centre for Linguistics
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/663314393
01
eng
30
00
This chapter presents reconstructed Proto-Quechua and Proto-Aymara lexical items related to cultivation and herding, and draws conclusions about language and subsistence in the ancient Andes. The patterns of lexical borrowing between the two lineages offer a novel empirical perspective on how early Quechuan and Aymaran speakers lived. When the many layers of borrowing are stripped away, it is clear that both were engaged in agropastoral economies before the languages first came into contact. Furthermore, the presence of terms from a wide range of ecological zones, from the high grasslands to (in the case of Quechua) the tropical lowlands, suggests that both languages cross-cut elevations in a manner consistent with the typically Andean system of ecological complementarity.
01
01
JB code
z.215.03ber
06
10.1075/z.215.03ber
47
73
27
Chapter
7
01
04
Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut)
Chapter 3. Subsistence terms in Unangam Tunuu (Aleut)
1
A01
01
JB code
237314394
Anna Berge
Berge, Anna
Anna
Berge
Alaska Native Language Center
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/237314394
01
eng
30
00
The Eskimo-Aleut are arctic and subarctic hunter-gatherers known for their geographic spread and successful adaptation to a harsh climate; they are one of the canonical examples of a people that spread without agriculture. One of the most prehistoric recent spreads in this language family occurred about 1000 years ago, with effects felt throughout coastal Alaska. One area of language contact and possible spread was in Southeast Alaska, between the Pacific Coast Yupik language Alutiiq and the Aleutian language Unangam Tunuu. In this paper, I look at the distribution of cognates and borrowings of subsistence terminology in Unangam Tunuu, and I show that Alutiiq must have spread into a previously Unangax̂ area as a result of warfare rather than subsistence activities.
01
01
JB code
z.215.04fra
06
10.1075/z.215.04fra
75
92
18
Chapter
8
01
04
Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture
Chapter 4. Lexical recycling as a lens onto shared Japano-Koreanic agriculture
1
A01
01
JB code
159314395
Alexander Francis-Ratte
Francis-Ratte, Alexander
Alexander
Francis-Ratte
Furman University
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/159314395
01
eng
30
00
Despite the existence of strong cognates in other realms of basic vocabulary, it remains unclear why Korean and Japanese share so few words for grain and agriculture. This paper proposes that pre-rice vocabulary has undergone a process of lexical recycling in Korean to refer to later rice-related practices. The observation that Korean words for ‘rice’ contain initial p suggests common derivations from pre-MK *po ‘rice(?)’ that is relatable to Old Japanese po ‘a grain’. This paper uncovers important Japano-Koreanic cognates, including ‘buckwheat,’ ‘millet,’ and ‘rice plant’. This analysis also shows how linguists may retrieve early agricultural terminology that has been replaced by more advanced practices.
01
01
JB code
z.215.05rob
06
10.1075/z.215.05rob
93
121
29
Chapter
9
01
04
Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers
Chapter 5. The language of the Transeurasian farmers
1
A01
01
JB code
129314396
Martine Robbeets
Robbeets, Martine
Martine
Robbeets
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/129314396
01
eng
30
00
The Farming Language Dispersal Hypothesis makes the radical and controversial claim that many of the world’s major language families owe their present-day distribution to the adoption of agriculture by their early speakers. Especially for regions such as Northern Asia, where farming is only marginally viable, this claim has been seriously called into question. This paper investigates to what extent agriculture impacted the dispersal of the Transeurasian language family, i.e. the genealogical grouping consisting of the Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Koreanic and Japonic languages. For this purpose, I establish the internal family structure of Transeurasian, reconstruct cultural vocabulary and situate the Transeurasian languages in time and space. Assessing the cultural reconstructions and mapping the tree topology, time-depth and homeland on the demographic transitions visible in the archaeological and genetic record, I find indications that proto-Transeurasian was spoken by people gradually adopting farming and that its dispersal was indeed driven by agriculture.
01
01
JB code
z.215.06sav
06
10.1075/z.215.06sav
123
154
32
Chapter
10
01
04
Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic
Chapter 6. Farming-related terms in Proto-Turkic and Proto-Altaic
1
A01
01
JB code
169314397
Alexander Savelyev
Savelyev, Alexander
Alexander
Savelyev
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/169314397
01
eng
30
00
Historical sources from different times describe Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic traditional economies as based on pastoralism, with agriculture playing only a minor role among their subsistence strategies. Cultural reconstruction as used by historical linguists may provide additional inferences about the relative importance of farming and pastoralism in these lineages. This paper focuses on the origin of agricultural and pastoralist terms in Proto-Turkic and their parallels in the other branches of Altaic, i.e., Mongolic and Tungusic. I show that the majority of the Turkic pastoralist lexicon has a secondary nature, being formed due to contact, derivation or lexical recycling. At the same time, farming-related terms in Turkic are mostly unborrowed and underived and a few of them have reliable Altaic connections. The very limited number of agricultural terms reconstructible to Proto-Altaic as compared to the preceding Proto-Transeurasian period can be attributed to a loss of farming-related lexicon over time after the break-up of Altaic.
01
01
JB code
z.215.07sch
06
10.1075/z.215.07sch
155
181
27
Chapter
11
01
04
Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family
Chapter 7. Farming and the Trans-New Guinea family
01
04
A
consideration
A consideration
1
A01
01
JB code
71314398
Antoinette Schapper
Schapper, Antoinette
Antoinette
Schapper
KITLV/University of Cologne
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/71314398
01
eng
30
00
The island of New Guinea, located to the north of Australia, is one of the world’s major centres of early agriculture and plant domestication. At the same time, a large number of the languages of New Guinea and adjacent areas share a common origin and are believed to belong to a single language family, the Trans-New Guinea family. This paper presents a first attempt to apply the farming-language dispersal hypothesis to the New Guinea case. While the archaeological literature on early agriculture in New Guinea has focused mainly on taro, there is reason to doubt that taro was associated with the Trans-New Guinea expansion. In this paper, I instead consider the role of banana and sugarcane. The occurrence in many Trans-New Guinea languages of related terms for these two crops suggests that these were part of the “farming package” which fuelled the expansion of the family and its speakers.
01
01
JB code
z.215.08van
06
10.1075/z.215.08van
183
214
32
Chapter
12
01
04
Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice
Chapter 8. The domestications and the domesticators of Asian rice
1
A01
01
JB code
120314399
George L. Driem
Driem, George L.
George L.
Driem
Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Bern, Switzerland
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/120314399
01
eng
30
00
Rice genetics has now provided molecular evidence for three distinct domestications of Asian rice, giving rise to ahu, indica and japonica rice and subsequently involving the multidirectional introgression of favoured alleles between these three families of Oryza sativa cultivars. The phylogeography of Asian wild and cultivated rice species also permits inferences with regard to the likely geographical range within which these three domestication processes involving Asian cultivated rice unfolded. Evidence from linguistic palaeontology permits the identification of two language families whose linguistic ancestors pose the likeliest candidates for the earliest rice domesticators, Austroasiatic and Hmong-Mien. The linguistic arguments and population genetic evidence on Asian rice are assessed. Recent advances in palaeobotany as well as a number of currently prevalent misunderstandings in rice archaeology are discussed. Another set of evidence from linguistic palaeontology involving reconstructible etyma denoting megafauna in light of the early Holocene distribution of these megafaunal species provides a geographical indication for the location of the early Austroasiatic homeland. Furthermore, the molecular genetics of human populations are discussed in order to shed light on the prehistory and geography of the Austroasiatic, Hmong-Mien and other language families. Finally, a synthesis of the disparate sets of evidence is presented.
01
01
JB code
z.215.09sta
06
10.1075/z.215.09sta
215
233
19
Chapter
13
01
04
Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon
Chapter 9. Macrofamilies and agricultural lexicon
01
04
Problems and perspectives
Problems and perspectives
1
A01
01
JB code
42314400
George Starostin
Starostin, George
George
Starostin
Russian State University for the Humanities/Russian Presidential Academy, Moscow
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/42314400
01
eng
30
00
It is more or less self-evident that the origins of agriculture cannot be directly associated with the ancestral speakers of any of the commonly accepted, non-controversial language families such as Indo-European, Semitic, Dravidian, etc., since these origins go much deeper back in time than any of these ancestral languages. Consequently, in this paper I present a brief overview of some of the most promising, if controversial, hypotheses on deep-level language relationship between various linguistic stocks of Western and Central Eurasia in terms of whether or not there is a chance of reconstructing at least a small amount of agricultural terminology for such hypothetical entities as Proto-Nostratic, Proto-Sino-Caucasian, and Proto-Afroasiatic. The overview leads to the conclusion that some of the most archaic agricultural terminology in the Near East may be associated with the North Caucasian linguistic family and, possibly, also with Basque as its nearest genetic relative; at the same time, evidence of ancient agricultural lexicon in the Afroasiatic stock remains at best circumstantial, whereas evidence from various lineages of “Nostratic” is practically non-existent.
01
01
JB code
z.215.10bos
06
10.1075/z.215.10bos
235
258
24
Chapter
14
01
04
Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers?
Chapter 10. Were the first Bantu speakers south of the rainforest farmers?
01
04
A
first assessment of the linguistic evidence
A first assessment of the linguistic evidence
1
A01
01
JB code
144314401
Koen Bostoen
Bostoen, Koen
Koen
Bostoen
UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent)
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/144314401
2
A01
01
JB code
474314402
Joseph Koni Muluwa
Koni Muluwa, Joseph
Joseph
Koni Muluwa
UGent Centre for Bantu Studies (BantUGent)
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/474314402
01
eng
30
00
Popular belief has it that the Bantu Expansion was a farming/language dispersal. However, there is neither conclusive archaeological nor linguistic evidence to substantiate this hypothesis, especially not for the initial spread in West-Central Africa. In this chapter we consider lexical reconstructions for both domesticated and wild plants in Proto-West-Coastal Bantu associated with the first Bantu speech communities south of the rainforest about 2500 years ago. The possibility to reconstruct terms for five different crops, i.e. pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum), okra (Hibiscus/Abelmoschus esculentus), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata), Bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranea) and plantain (Musa spp.), indicates that by that time Bantu speakers did know how to cultivate plants. At the same time, they still strongly depended on the plant resources that could be collected in their natural environment, as is evidenced by a preliminary assessment of reconstructible names for wild plants. Agriculture in Central Africa was indeed “a slow revolution”, as the late Jan Vansina once proposed, and certainly not the principal motor behind the early Bantu Expansion.
01
01
JB code
z.215.11jos
06
10.1075/z.215.11jos
259
274
16
Chapter
15
01
04
Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal
Chapter 11. Expanding the methodology of lexical examination in the investigation of the intersection of early agriculture and language dispersal
1
A01
01
JB code
556314403
Brian D. Joseph
Joseph, Brian D.
Brian D.
Joseph
The Ohio State University
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/556314403
01
eng
30
00
Analysis of agricultural vocabulary remains one of the most compelling methodologies bearing on Renfrew’s Farming/Language Dispersal Hypothesis, by which the reconstructed lexicon for a proto-language of a well-dispersed language family is predicted to contain several agricultural items. Mostly, though, this methodology has involved noting the presence or absence of particular lexical items for a given proto-language and drawing inferences from that, or working out root derivations and drawing appropriate inferences. I propose here two new types of lexically based argument, by way of expanding the methodology of lexical examination and analysis, looking first at derivational processes involved in the creation of relevant words and the meaning that such processes add to the derivative, and then at religious rituals and mythology to examine the embedding of agricultural vocabulary into the religious practices and mythological tales associated with early Indo-European culture. Ultimately, then, I argue that it is not enough to just look at the meanings of particular words and to try to develop a sense of what they originally meant, nor is it enough to determine the source of the words (derivation, etymology). Rather, one also has to look at how the words were used, what is reconstructible about the use and form of the word, and what the cultural context was for the words. Only then can insights derived from lexical examination be used in developing a sense of prehistory.
01
01
JB code
z.215.12kum
06
10.1075/z.215.12kum
275
290
16
Chapter
16
01
04
Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian
Chapter 12. Agricultural terms in Indo-Iranian
1
A01
01
JB code
620314404
Martin Joachim Kümmel
Kümmel, Martin Joachim
Martin Joachim
Kümmel
Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/620314404
01
eng
30
00
The article investigates the agricultural lexicon of Indo-Iranian, especially its earlier records, and what it may tell us about the spread of farming. After some general remarks on “Neolithic” vocabulary, a short overview of the animal husbandry terminology shows that this field of vocabulary was evidently well-established in Proto-Indo-Iranian, with many cognate terms. Words for cattle, horses, sheep and goats are well developed and mostly inherited, while evidence for pigs is more limited, ad the words for donkey and camel look like common loans. A more extensive discussion of plant terminology reveals that while some generic terms for grain are inherited, more specific words for different kinds of cereals show few inherited terms and/or irregular variation, and the same is even clearer for pulses and some other vegetables. The terminology for agricultural terminology is largely different from that of most European branches of Indo-European. The conclusion is that the cultural background behind these linguistic data points to spreading of a mainly pastoralist culture in the case of Indo-Iranian.
01
01
JB code
z.215.13gar
06
10.1075/z.215.13gar
291
311
21
Chapter
17
01
04
Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans
Chapter 13. Milk and the Indo-Europeans
1
A01
01
JB code
557314405
Romain Garnier
Garnier, Romain
Romain
Garnier
Université de Limoges and Institut Universitaire de France
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/557314405
2
A01
01
JB code
798314406
Laurent Sagart
Sagart, Laurent
Laurent
Sagart
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/798314406
3
A01
01
JB code
110314407
Benoît Sagot
Sagot, Benoît
Benoît
Sagot
Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique
07
https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/110314407
01
eng
30
00
Recent evidence from archaeology and ancient DNA converge to indicate that the Yamnaya culture, often regarded as the bearer of the Proto-Indo-European language, underwent a strong population expansion in the late 4th and early 3rd millennia BCE. It suggests that the underlying reason for that expansion might be the then unique capacity to digest animal milk in adulthood. We examine the early Indo-European milk-related vocabulary to confirm the special role of animal milk in Indo-European expansions. We show that Proto-Indo-European did not have a specialized root for ‘to milk’ and argue that the IE root *h2melg̑- ‘to milk’ is secondary and post-Anatolian. We take this innovation as an indication of the novelty of animal milking in early Indo-European society. Together with a detailed study of language-specific innovations in this semantic field, we conclude that the ability to digest milk played an important role in boosting Proto-Indo-European demography.
01
01
JB code
z.215.ai
06
10.1075/z.215.ai
313
313
1
Miscellaneous
18
01
04
Language index
Language index
01
eng
01
01
JB code
z.215.si
06
10.1075/z.215.si
321
321
1
Miscellaneous
19
01
04
Subject index
Subject index
01
eng
01
JB code
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
01
JB code
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/z.215
Amsterdam
NL
00
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers
onix@benjamins.nl
04
01
00
20171221
C
2017
John Benjamins
D
2017
John Benjamins
02
WORLD
WORLD
US CA MX
09
01
JB
1
John Benjamins Publishing Company
+31 20 6304747
+31 20 6739773
bookorder@benjamins.nl
01
https://benjamins.com
21
12
18
01
00
Unqualified price
02
JB
1
02
95.00
EUR
02
00
Unqualified price
02
80.00
01
Z
0
GBP
GB
US CA MX
01
01
JB
2
John Benjamins Publishing Company
+1 800 562-5666
+1 703 661-1501
benjamins@presswarehouse.com
01
https://benjamins.com
21
12
18
01
00
Unqualified price
02
JB
1
02
143.00
USD