Talk:Origin of the Basques

message: What is that section actually proving? Or trying to prove? Metallurgy was an import in the vast majority of cultures so the fact Basque, along with most other languages, ended up borrowing metallurgical terms (beyond iron/copper/solver/gold) proves very little. Akerbeltz (talk) 12:03, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Indo-European is R1a. --Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii (talk) 06:18, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linguistic Evidence 

message: "The Basque Paradigm: Genetic Evidence of a Maternal Continuity in the Franco-Cantabrian Region since Pre-Neolithic Times" The American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 90, Issue 3, 486-493, 23 February 2012
: abstract says " We detected signals of the expansion of these haplogroups at ∼4,000 years before present (YBP) and estimated their separation from the pan-European gene pool at ∼8,000 YBP, antedating the Indo-European arrival to the region. Our results clearly support the hypothesis of a partial genetic continuity of contemporary Basques with the preceding Paleolithic/Mesolithic settlers of their homeland." Dougweller (talk) 11:31, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: And even more recently, "The Expanded mtDNA Phylogeny of the Franco-Cantabrian Region Upholds the Pre-Neolithic Genetic Substrate of Basques" (entire article). "The seclusion and diversity of these female genetic lineages support a local origin in the Franco-Cantabrian area during the Mesolithic of southwestern Europe, ~10,000 years before present (YBP), with signals of expansions at ~3,500 YBP. These findings provide robust evidence of a partial genetic continuity between contemporary autochthonous populations from the Franco-Cantabrian region, specifically the Basques, and Paleolithic/Mesolithic hunter-gatherer groups. Furthermore, our results raise the current proportion (≈15%) of the Franco-Cantabrian maternal gene pool with a putative pre-Neolithic origin to ≈35%, further supporting the notion of a predominant Paleolithic genetic substrate in extant European populations." No mention of Cro-Magnon. Dougweller (talk) 11:35, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: But Cro-Magnon is implied - "Paleolithic hunter-gatherer groups" - so it is either them, or their direct descendants in the area, who technologically would have been more or less equivalent.
why is there still stuff about post ice age R1b expansion. When it is now concluded 100% that this came from eastern europe in the bronze age. Sykes and oppenheimer nonsense need not be included. Its just wrong.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.3.238.7 (talk) 15:16, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genetics 

message: Rather odd is this:
:The main hypotheses about the origin of the Basques are:
:*A
:*B, but this one is now obsolete
:*C, but this one is now obsolete
It kind of gives you only one serious option while simultaneously giving the idea of there being some sort of dispute. Bataaf van Oranje (talk) 00:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure if one can call it dispute but outliers always attract attention and due to the striking differences between the Basque and their neighbouring, very clearly Indo-European neighbours, have attracted all sorts over the last centuries, from serious scholars and scientists to crackpots. Unfortunately some of the less serious opinions put forward have been so prominent that you can't just ignore them. Akerbeltz (talk) 18:02, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Obsolete

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Origin of the Basques. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081006160601/http://www.arqueotavira.com/Mapas/Iberia/Populi.htm to http://www.arqueotavira.com/Mapas/Iberia/Populi.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:26, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In article the Caucasian-Basque language hypothesis is presented in deliberately grotesque silly look. Obviously outdated data are used for criticism, at the same time the genetic material which also doesn't have any relation to a subject is attracted.This bransh of the Basque-Caucasian hypothesis carries obviously outdated lines because modern scientists don't find it possible to pull together the North Caucasian languages and Kartvelian. They are parted even in different macrofamilies. "Some researchers(sorry, who is specifically?) have propounded the similarities between the Basque language and the Caucasian languages, especially the Georgian language (Georgian has no relationship even with the next North Caucasian!!!)And further vast idle talk of haughty contents: "The comparison between the matrilineal and patrilineal DNA of the native peoples from the Basque Country and Georgia has allowed the discovery of significant differences. The hypothesis that related both populations is only based on the typological similarities, which is never a good marker of linguistic kinship. These superficial similarities in the linguistic typologies do not seem to accompany a genetic relation at a population level".And has all this what relation to a real subject? Any! We reads criticism which is based only on old hypotheses from which - linguists (including caucasiologists refused long ago).What and whom refutes this verbose statement? Although the idea of a genetical relationship between Basque and Caucasian languages was envisaged by 20th century linguists like Alfredo Trombetti, René Lafon and Karl Bouda, it wasn't properly formulated until circa 1970, when the Polish geographer Bogdan Zaborski grouped Basque, Caucasian languages and Burushaski into an Asianitic family. In the 90's, the American linguist John Bengtson proposed a Macro-Caucasian (also called Vasco-Caucasian) phylum comprising Basque, North Caucasian1 and Burushaski and being part of a larger Dene-Caucasian (also called Sino-Caucasian) phylum comprising Sino-Tibetan, Yenisseian and Na-Dené, first posited by the Russian linguists Sergei Starostin and Sergei Nikolayev1.Why you have no word about works of John D. Bengtson Materials for a Comparative Grammar of the Dene-CaucaLanguagessian (Sino-Caucasian) Languages;Basque and the other Mediterranean languages;Sino-Caucasian Macrophylum: Bengtson 1991;Wider genetic affiliations of the chinese language--Wrkan (talk) 20:07, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: The Basque-Caucasian hypothesis, is not the Georgian genetics and not Georgian language

message: This statement seems unjustified to me. It presumes that not only was basque uninfluenced by other languages but that basque and/or related extinct iberian languages could not have influenced other languages. I don't see how this inference can be made from "native". It's pretty clear that if an ancestor of the basque language had influenced sumerian several millenia ago, it could in no way be deduced from that fact that sumerian was the ancestor of the basque language. This definition needs to be fixed. Comiscuous (talk) 05:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess the sentence refers to a common ancestor according to the tree model. In terms of influences, it's obvious that Basque has given and received influences vis-à-vis other languages, and to the best of my knowledge nobody denies that. --Jotamar (talk) 21:38, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's a very clumsy way of saying "it's a language isolate", in which case I agree that this could be worded much better. Akerbeltz (talk) 22:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "without the possibility of finding any kind of relationship between the Basque language and other modern languages in other regions."