New Indo-European phylogenetic tree

[Token]

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alexei-Kassian/publication/334633681/figure/fig1/AS:783804704763904@1563885012949/Manually-constructed-strict-consensus-tree-of-the-IE-family-based-on-the-Stage-2.png

Link (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334633681_Rapid_radiation_of_the_Inner_Indo-European_languages_an_advanced_approach_to_Indo-_European_lexicostatistics_pre-print)
Abstract: In this paper, we present a new reconstruction of Indo-European phylogeny based on thirteen 110-item basic wordlists for protolanguages of IE subgroups (Proto-Germanic, Proto-Slavic, etc.) or ancient languages of the corresponding subgroups (Hittite, Ancient Greek, etc.). We apply reasonably formal techniques of linguistic data collection and post-processing (onomasiological reconstruction, derivational drift elimination, homoplastic optimization) that have been recently proposed or specially developed for the present study. We use sequential phylogenetic workflow and obtain a consensus tree based on several algorithms (Bayesian inference, maximum parsimony, neighbor joining; without topological constraints applied). The resulting tree topology and datings are entirely compatible with established expert views. Our main finding is the multifurcation of the Inner IE clade into four branches ca. 3357-2162 BC: (1) Greek-Armenian, (2) Albanian, (3) Italic-Germanic-Celtic, (4) Balto-Slavic-Indo-Iranian. The proposed radiation scenario may be reconciled with diverse opinions on Inner IE branchings previously expressed by Indo-Europeanists.

[Creoda]

Any new take-away's from this? Sorry I'm too lazy to go through it.

[Token]

Any new take-away's from this? Sorry I'm too lazy to go through it.

Some highlights:


Moreover, Bayesian chronological intervals (Table 3) do not contradict radiocarbon datings of archaeological cultures which may be associated with the spread of Indo-European languages. Thus, the split-off of Tocharian can be identified with the migration that gave rise to the Afanasievo culture (Danilenko 1974: 138, 142, 157; Semenov 1987; Mallory 1997; Anthony & Ringe 2015: 208). The current C14 dates for Afanasievo place it in the interval from 29th to 25th centuries BC (Svyatko et al. 2009: 257). The 29th century BC date for the rise of Afanasievo aligns well with the Bayesian date for the Tocharian split-off: 3727–2262 BC (mean 3011 BC).

The end of the Sintashta archaeological culture, frequently associated with Proto-Indo-Iranian speakers (Parpola & Carpelan 2005: 129; Anthony 2007: 408–411; Kuz’mina 2007), is dated to the beginning of the 18th century BC (Hanks, Epimakhov & Renfrew 2007; Epimakhov & Krause 2013). Cf. the Bayesian dates for the break-up of Proto-Indo-Iranian: 2044–1458 BC (mean 1740 BC).


Since the Corded Ware culture is usually associated (non-exclusively) with the ancestors of Balto-Slavic peoples (Mallory & Adams 1997; Anthony 2007: 367), it seems reasonable to suppose that the Balto-Slavic–Indo-Iranian break-up may be correlated with the end of Corded Ware. According to the current view, “[t]he years between 2300 and 2100 B.C. were a period during which the Corded Ware culture ended in most regions, especially in the southern part of its domain (basins of the Danube, Upper Rhine, Elbe, and Vistula). Only in the Russian Plain did it last until 2000 B.C.” (Czebreszuk 2004a: 469). These datings align relatively well with the Bayesian dates for the Balto-Slavic–Indo-Iranian break-up: 2723–1790 BC (mean 2241 BC).

Apparently there is no way Bell Beaker could have spoken Proto-Celtic. According to their results, it is possible that they spoke Italo-Celto-Germanic.

Finally, it is not excluded that the Italic-Germanic-Celtic unity should be associated with the Bell Beaker culture (cf. similarly Mallory (2013), where it is proposed to connect the Bell Beaker culture, due to its chronological depth, not with Proto-Celtic per se, but generally with an ancestor of “North-West” Indo-European languages). Recent ancient DNA studies have confirmed that the spread of this culture in most places (with the significant exception of Iberia) was associated with a real migration rather than simply with a dissemination of a “cultural package” (Olalde et al. 2018). The latest dates for this culture extend into the first centuries of the second millennium B.C. (Czebreszuk 2004b: 482). Cf. the Bayesian dates for the Italic-Germanic-Celtic break-up: 2655–1537 BC (mean 2080 BC)


The most interesting and important result of the current study is the multifurcation of Inner IE into four branches: (1) Greek-Armenian, (2) Italic-Germanic-Celtic, (3) Balto-Slavic–Indo-Iranian, (4) Albanian. Such a radiation of the main Inner IE branches, although formally innovative, is not at all incompatible with established expert views. Indeed, the majority of Indo-Europeanists, if not all of them, agree with the outlier status of Anatolian and Tocharian and with the existence of recent clades such as Indo-Iranian or Balto-Slavic. But what is in the middle of the IE tree? Despite more than two hundred years of intense development of Indo-European studies, there is no consensus or mainstream opinion on what the early Inner IE branchings could look like. The lack of an evident solution in terms of a tree structure leads many Indo-Europeanists to reject the tree model altogether or to accept a total fan-like model for the disintegration of IE which does not make much sense from the historical point of view. This lack of consensus follows from the lack of reliable and consistent common innovations shared by some subset(s) of Inner IE branches that could help to reveal the early topology of this clade. In such a situation the multifurcation scenario suggested by our analysis is the most natural and likely solution.

https://i.imgur.com/lfoneDF.png

[Token]

According to these dates Celtic might have gotten into Britain by the Iron age, which corresponds perfectly with the Hallstatt period.

[Creoda]

According to these dates Celtic might have gotten into Britain by the Iron age, which corresponds perfectly with the Hallstatt period.
Nice when centuries of traditional wisdom is confirmed.

[Ouistreham]

Thanks for posting this.
Sounds very logical and fully convincing.