Hi Lluis,

'Uralic' and 'Indo-European' are clasified as related but separate
families of languages.  See chart below.

With best wishes,


http://www.friesian.com/trees.htm <http://www.friesian.com/trees.htm>

Language Affinities Beween Autochthonous Populations

The second tree below essentially takes the first one but draws the tree
over again using language rather than genetic affinities. What is of
interest are the similarities to the first tree, indicating that human
languages, which certainly antedate the 300,000 year mark (see Derek
Bickerton, Language and Species [University of Chicago Press, 1990]),
may also have a common origin in Africa itself. Many of the higher order
groupings, however, as discussed above, are rather speculative. The
theory of the "Nostratic" languages, which combines Afro-Asiatic
(Hamito-Semitic) <http://www.friesian.com/trees.htm#semitic> ,
Indo-European <http://www.friesian.com/cognates.htm> , Ural-Altaic
<http://www.friesian.com/turkia.htm#altaic> , Dravidian, and American
Indian languages, is really the most dramatic but also may have the most
credible evidence in common vocabulary items and systematic phonetic
relationships. The grouping of Chinese with Basque
<http://www.friesian.com/perifran.htm#basque> , which otherwise seems
unrelated to any other languages, seems more than a little bizarre but,
if true, would be evidence of population movements and distribution
prior to the early historical presence of Indo-European speakers across
northern Europe and Asia. I have never seen explanations of the actual
evidence for the Basque-Chinese connection.

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Lluís Mendieta <lme...@...> wrote:
> Hi, Ed
> Well, I am at lost in what you mind
> I understand that they are westerners, as we are, even being
indo-european.. (so, roots in east).
> But all that is dualistic....and not zen (or at least, deceiving) :-)
> With best wishes
> Lluís

Hi Lluis,

> "Finnish is the eponymous member of the Finno-Ugric language family
and is typologically between fusional and agglutinative languages. It
modifies and inflects the forms of nouns, adjectives, pronouns, numerals
and verbs, depending on their roles in the sentence.
> Finnish is a member of the Baltic-Finnic subgroup of the Finno-Ugric
group of languages which in turn is a member of the Uralic family of
languages. The Baltic-Finnic subgroup also includes Estonian and other
minority languages spoken around the Baltic Sea.
> The Finns are more genetically similar to their Indo-European speaking
neighbors than to the speakers of the geographically close Finno-Ugric
language, Sami. It has been argued that a native Finnic-speaking
population therefore absorbed northward migrating Indo-European speakers
who adopted the Finnic language, giving rise to the modern Finns."
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_language

>Wist best wishes,

> --ED

> Hi, Bill
> I beg to differ in two non zen questions
> -Hungry? has the subject implicit. You do not place it, but it is
> The werb in spanish or catalan would be also implicit, so, I suppose
same in english.
> -finnish is a westerner language. And they have a lot of words to
design the relationship within family.
> With best wishes
> Lluís

> Anthony,
> I know Thai's drop subject and sometimes even object all the time, but
> thought it was just because they, like Westerners, are lazy.
> For example, I could ask you: `Are you hungry?', or I could just ask
> saying: `Hungry?' (with a rising tone). That's just laziness, or being
> casual in your speech.
> I do think language does reveal the different values of culture. For
> example in Thai there are only 3 tenses: past, present and future;
> there are many, many adjectives and pronouns that are used to
> identify the speaker's relationship with the one addressed. In English
> there are many (27?) verb tenses and very few special pronouns. This I
> think shows that Westerner's value time more than Asians; whereas
Asians put
> more importance on personal relationships than time.
> ...Bill!

Reply via email to