Wacky theory on Basque.

A forum for discussing linguistics or just languages in general.
DV82LECM
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri 16 Dec 2016, 03:31

Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by DV82LECM » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 17:01

What is there, if any, in the form of research done to suggest that Basque evolved from Etruscan?
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1225
Joined: Mon 19 Sep 2011, 18:37

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by Salmoneus » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 17:24

Basque did not evolve from Etruscan.
User avatar
Frislander
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by Frislander » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 17:24

Salmoneus wrote:Basque did not evolve from Etruscan.
Thank you Sal.
User avatar
KaiTheHomoSapien
sinic
sinic
Posts: 396
Joined: Mon 15 Feb 2016, 06:10
Location: Napa Valley, California

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by KaiTheHomoSapien » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 18:08

Seems like there are a lot of theories out there that link the pre-Indo-European languages of Europe together, but there seems to be little evidence to support a link between Etruscan and Basque. I think Vasconic and Tyrsenian were distinct pre-IE families of Europe, two among probably more.
Don't live to conlang; conlang to live.

My conlang: Image Lihmelinyan
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2609
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by sangi39 » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 18:21

I think we can safely rule out Basque evolving directly from Etruscan simply on chronological grounds since Proto-Basque and Estruscan were likely spoken at roughly the same time.

Whether the Vasconic languages are in any way related to the Tyrsenian languages is another question and would be very hard, if not impossible, to answer on the basis of current evidence.
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
DV82LECM
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri 16 Dec 2016, 03:31

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by DV82LECM » Thu 08 Jun 2017, 04:07

Okay...cool. I never implied a direct link, though.
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2784
Joined: Sat 22 Nov 2014, 04:48

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by elemtilas » Thu 08 Jun 2017, 12:34

Salmoneus wrote:Basque did not evolve from Etruscan.
Quite right. Anyway, it was long ago determined to be much more closely related to Dutch.
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera
alynnidalar
roman
roman
Posts: 922
Joined: Sun 17 Aug 2014, 02:22
Location: Michigan, USA

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by alynnidalar » Thu 08 Jun 2017, 14:40

DV82LECM wrote:Okay...cool. I never implied a direct link, though.
You asked about Basque evolving from Etruscan; that certainly implies a direct link. Not sure how a language could evolve from another language without there being a direct link!

(perhaps we're not using the same definitions of "evolve" and "direct link", though--if so, can you clarify what you meant?)
User avatar
Lambuzhao
earth
earth
Posts: 7142
Joined: Sun 13 May 2012, 01:57

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by Lambuzhao » Thu 08 Jun 2017, 16:38

elemtilas wrote:
Salmoneus wrote:Basque did not evolve from Etruscan.
Quite right. Anyway, it was long ago determined to be much more closely related to Dutch.
Bad Boy Basque and Freaky-Deaky Dutch... knew it all along. [B)]
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2784
Joined: Sat 22 Nov 2014, 04:48

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by elemtilas » Thu 08 Jun 2017, 16:58

Lambuzhao wrote:
elemtilas wrote:
Salmoneus wrote:Basque did not evolve from Etruscan.
Quite right. Anyway, it was long ago determined to be much more closely related to Dutch.
Bad Boy Basque and Freaky-Deaky Dutch... knew it all along. [B)]
Quite so. I for one was glad to hear the who sordid affair was at last put right!
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera
User avatar
qwed117
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4277
Joined: Thu 20 Nov 2014, 02:27

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by qwed117 » Thu 08 Jun 2017, 20:08

I wouldn't be surprised if someone has linked Basque to Etruscan. Some believe that the Nuragic people are related to the Basque, and others to the Tyrrhenians. I don't find it unlikely that one person could see the two overlapping.
Spoiler:
My minicity is Zyphrazia and Novland
What is made of man will crumble away.
User avatar
Rheddie
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat 10 Jun 2017, 22:53
Location: The Land Which Rhyme Forgot
Contact:

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by Rheddie » Wed 05 Jul 2017, 22:56

hoho this is wachy
ωqések zusada axbuqev́ : cuaqek cuaqzaént epbióv́
Dingleberry
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed 16 Aug 2017, 16:17

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by Dingleberry » Wed 16 Aug 2017, 16:20

There's always room for debate but there is a possible genetic link (or perhaps a sprachbund) linking Iberian, Basque and Aquitanian.
User avatar
AlwaysForget
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon 08 Aug 2016, 04:44
Location: USA

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by AlwaysForget » Wed 15 Nov 2017, 03:47

I know I'm sorta necroing this thread, but I thought it'd be interesting to do a small comparison of some basic Etruscan and Basque vocabulary. I know this has probably been done before but I'll just do it myself for the fun of it and see what results I get. Most of the Etruscan inscriptions in my book are votary and / or funeral inscriptions so this can kind of limit my vocab. The list is in no particular order and all Basque words are cited without the singular article -a. Basque words are on the right side and Etruscan on the left.

ruva : anaia "brother"
apa : aita "father"
clan : seme "son"
ati : ama "mother"
θu : bat "one"
zal : bi "two"
ci : hiru "three"
śa : lau "four"
maχ : bost "five"
huθ : sei "six"
cezp : zazpi "seven"
semφ : zortzi "eight"
nurφ : bederatzi "nine"
śar : hamar "ten"
zaθrum : hogei "twenty"
cealx : hogei-ta hamar "thirty"
avil : urte "year"
ein : ez "not"
mi : ni "1st person singular"
θi : ur "water"
-śa : -a "definite suffix"
θui : hemen "here"
uśil : eguzki "sun"
meθlum(e) : hiri "city"
pulum : izar "star"
-r(a)- : -ak "plural suffix (animate)
-xva~-cva~-va : -ak "plural suffix (inanimate)
acil : lan "work"

This is my second write-up of this, because the page actually refreshed and I lost it all :mrred: . I had more comparisons in the original, so I hope this was good enough. Besides the words listed here there are various similarities and differences between the two grammatically. For example, both languages are predominantly SOV, genitives are positioned before nouns, adjectives follow the noun and there are postpositions. None of this really means anything, for those are all very common in languages in general and SOV constituent orders. In Basque numerals always come before nouns (except with the number one "bat" (and sometimes two "bi" in Bizkaian only, e.g. Gizon bat "a man" vs Bost gizon "five men"). In Etruscan numbers tend to follow the noun (e.g. clenar zal "two sons"). While all Basque nouns take the same suffix in the plural, Etruscan apparently has a difference in animacy which determines which plural suffix a noun gets (clan : clenar "sons" / pulum : pulumxva "stars" VS semea : semeak "sons" / izarra : izarrak "stars"). To finish this off, Etruscan is a nominative-accusative language while Basque is ergative-absolutive, not that syntactic alignment can't change diachronically. I could attempt to dive into this phonologically in order to further prove my point that they're not related at all, but if you really want to read about that just pick up a copy of R.L. Trask's The History of Basque.

Sources:
Zikh Rasna A Manual of the Etruscan Language by R.E. Wallace
Basque-English English-Basque Dictionary by Gorka Aulestia and Linda White
A Grammar of Basque by Jose Ignacio Hualde et al
:usa: [tick] :de: [:)] :es:/:fr: (Basque) [:S]
Iyionaku
roman
roman
Posts: 1414
Joined: Sun 25 May 2014, 13:17

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by Iyionaku » Wed 15 Nov 2017, 15:37

Although I totally agree on your general statement - Basque and Etruscan are not related - I find it really dubious to try and prove that with a seemingly random list of words. With the same method, one could try to prove that German and English are not related:
Edit: No, one could not. I went through your list and given the words you provided it would be 100% obvious that German and English are related. I take everything back I have said before.
Heaven and Earth, but I feel the color of the cake when you keep the Victoria.
I had a mantra on the moss and I had to go to bed.


Oh, and there is a [ɕ] in my name!
User avatar
Frislander
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by Frislander » Wed 15 Nov 2017, 16:41

AlwaysForget wrote:
Wed 15 Nov 2017, 03:47
long list of obvious non-cognates
I think that pretty much settles it.

I think the only reason people are so keen to match them up is because humans don't like anomalies, and Basque and Etruscan are just such obvious anomalies in the sea of Indo-European that for some people it's almost like they're begging to be matched to something (similarly with some of the isolates/small language families of Africa for example).
User avatar
AlwaysForget
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon 08 Aug 2016, 04:44
Location: USA

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by AlwaysForget » Wed 15 Nov 2017, 16:59

Iyionaku wrote:
Wed 15 Nov 2017, 15:37
Although I totally agree on your general statement - Basque and Etruscan are not related - I find it really dubious to try and prove that with a seemingly random list of words. With the same method, one could try to prove that German and English are not related:
Edit: No, one could not. I went through your list and given the words you provided it would be 100% obvious that German and English are related. I take everything back I have said before.
Ideally I would have had a better corpus to choose from, but unfortunately when you're limited to short funeral inscriptions, it's hard to find much more than religious words, kin terms and numbers. If only we could know more about Etruscan, not to mention Aquitanian, which would be a better comparison to do than with modern Basque [:(], not that I think it'd suddenly reveal a hidden relationship or anything
:usa: [tick] :de: [:)] :es:/:fr: (Basque) [:S]
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 226
Joined: Tue 28 Jul 2015, 17:43

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by ixals » Wed 15 Nov 2017, 17:09

AlwaysForget wrote:
Wed 15 Nov 2017, 16:59
Ideally I would have had a better corpus to choose from, [...]
I think this is quite the good corpus so that one can see that these two are likely not related. Multiple words in your list are found in the Swadesh list as well which are lemmas that don't get replaced as often as others. The numbers from one to five are completely different, as well as word like "sun", "star" and "water". I don't think either Basque or Etruscan could change that much of its core vocabulary.
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :fra:, :por:, :pol:

Цiски a Central Slavic conlang
Noattȯč a future German conlang [on hold]
Tungōnis Vīdīnōs Proto-Germanic goes Romance [on hold]
User avatar
AlwaysForget
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon 08 Aug 2016, 04:44
Location: USA

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by AlwaysForget » Wed 15 Nov 2017, 17:22

ixals wrote:
Wed 15 Nov 2017, 17:09
AlwaysForget wrote:
Wed 15 Nov 2017, 16:59
Ideally I would have had a better corpus to choose from, [...]
I think this is quite the good corpus so that one can see that these two are likely not related. Multiple words in your list are found in the Swadesh list as well which are lemmas that don't get replaced as often as others. The numbers from one to five are completely different, as well as word like "sun", "star" and "water". I don't think either Basque or Etruscan could change that much of its core vocabulary.
I agree, the differences in the numbers alone convinced me that they were not related. This is obvious, but if we take the numbers 1-10 from several IE languages seperated by a few thousand years we can still detect what seems to be correspondances or similarities pretty easily.

një : eins : un
dy : zwei : deux
tre : drei : trois
katër : vier : quatre
pesë : fünf : cinq
gjashtë : sechs : six
shtatë : sieben : sept
tetë : acht : huit
nëntë : neun : neuf
dhjetë : zehn : dix
:usa: [tick] :de: [:)] :es:/:fr: (Basque) [:S]
User avatar
KaiTheHomoSapien
sinic
sinic
Posts: 396
Joined: Mon 15 Feb 2016, 06:10
Location: Napa Valley, California

Re: Wacky theory on Basque.

Post by KaiTheHomoSapien » Wed 15 Nov 2017, 17:25

Frislander wrote:
Wed 15 Nov 2017, 16:41

I think that pretty much settles it.

I think the only reason people are so keen to match them up is because humans don't like anomalies, and Basque and Etruscan are just such obvious anomalies in the sea of Indo-European that for some people it's almost like they're begging to be matched to something (similarly with some of the isolates/small language families of Africa for example).
I must be weird then, because I tend to like anomalies; I find them fascinating. I'm always disappointed when I find out that some "pre-IE" root in Greek or Latin might actually just be an odd outcome of an IE root. (I was even disappointed when the "Koreanic" family came about and no longer was Korean considered an isolate). I like mysteries. But I realize I'm an anomaly [:P]

That said, I'm not opposed to the idea of Etruscan being part of the "Tyrsenian family". But a link to Basque seems unlikely.
Don't live to conlang; conlang to live.

My conlang: Image Lihmelinyan
Post Reply