"Altaic" people originate in modern-day East China - new groundbreaking study

[Dunai]

This new study published by researchers of the reputable Max Planck Institute seem to make a very solid case from both linguistic, archeological and genetic perspective for the existence of a common Transeurasian (formerly known Altaic) Heimat of both Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Korean and Japanese languages around the Amur river in modern-day East-China. Personally I am pretty baffled by this reveal, since I already thought there was a scientific consensus that the "Altaic" language family is not a valid theory, but this scientific paper does seem to bring very new and convincing evidence to support this theory.

"Linguistics
We collected a new dataset of 3,193 cognate sets that represent 254 basic vocabulary concepts for 98 Transeurasian languages, including dialects and historical varieties. We applied Bayesian methods to infer a dated phylogeny of the Transeurasian languages (Supplementary Data 24). Our results indicate a time-depth of 9181 bp (5595–12793 95% highest probability density (95% HPD)) for the Proto-Transeurasian root of the family; 6811 bp (4404–10166 95% HPD) for Proto-Altaic, the unity of Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic languages; 4491 bp (2599–6373 95% HPD) for Mongolo-Tungusic; and 5458 bp (3335–8024 95% HPD) for Japano-Koreanic. These dates estimate the time-depth of the initial break-up of a given language family into more than one foundational subgroup.

Archeology
Although Neolithic Northeast Asia was characterized by widespread plant cultivation, cereal farming expanded from several centres of domestication, the most important of which for Transeurasian was the West Liao basin, where cultivation of broomcorn millet started by 9000 bp. Extracting data from the published literature, we scored 172 archaeological features for 255 Neolithic and Bronze Age sites and compiled an inventory of 269 directly carbon-14-dated early crop remains in northern China, the Primorye, Korea and Japan.

The main results of our Bayesian analysis, which clusters the 255 sites according to cultural similarity, are visualized in Fig. 2b. We find a cluster of Neolithic cultures in the West Liao basin, from which two branches associated with millet farming separate: a Korean Chulmun branch and a branch of Neolithic cultures covering the Amur, Primorye and Liaodong. This confirms previous findings about the dispersal of millet agriculture to Korea by 5500 bp and via the Amur to the Primorye by 5000 bp.

Genetics
The PCA shows a general trend for Neolithic individuals from Mongolia to contain high Amur-like ancestry with extensive gene flow from western Eurasia increasing from the Bronze to Middle Ages. Whereas the Turkic-speaking Xiongnu, Old Uyghur and Türk are extremely scattered, the Mongolic-speaking Iron Age Xianbei fall closer to the Amur cluster than the Shiwei, Rouran, Khitan and Middle Mongolian Khanate from Antiquity and the Middle Ages.

As Amur-related ancestry can be traced down to speakers of Japanese and Korean13, it appears to be the original genetic component common to all speakers of Transeurasian languages. By analysing ancient genomes from Korea, we find that Jomon ancestry was present on the Peninsula by 6000 bp."



https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04108-8

[Dunai]

Hmm, no discussion so far? I thought many people are interested in Central and East Asian peoples origins.

[Dunai]

[zebruh]

Not here. But its not too surprising. But I guess somewhat interesting because people associated the natives with being close to central asians and Siberians not chinese.

What woulf be interesting is to compare the Chinese mtdna haplogroups Siberia aboriginal and central asian Mtdna with Natives.

[reboun]

I guessed that. Central Asian Turkics have more resemblance with East Asians than they have with Siberians. Siberians are more like Native North Americans.

[zebruh]

I guessed that. Central Asian Turkics have more resemblance with East Asians than they have with Siberians. Siberians are more like Native North Americans.

The altaic turks are the ones that were most closely related to natives.

In terms of mtdna i know japanese have haplogroup D. And I think C but I don't know about A or B. B is common in polynesia I think. But the sub haplos of where exactly they diverge would be more interesting

[Leto]

The Altaic Gods were fully Mongoloid. The rest are just assimilated fucks

[Hektor12]

Interesting. So are we offsping of Korean-Japanese farmers assimilated by west eurasian nomadic pastoralists?

I will wait for Kaspias comment on this to be honest.

[Dunai]

Double

[Dunai]

Interesting. So are we offsping of Korean-Japanese farmers assimilated by west eurasian nomadic pastoralists?

I will wait for Kaspias comment on this to be honest.

Incorrect. Watch the video at least from 52:40 (the conclusions part) and you will see what a solid case this team of researchers have made about the Urheimat of Transeurasian languages being around the Amur river, starting around 9000 BP. The group have split in separate Altaic and Korean-Japanese branches, so Turkic languages don't originate from Korean-Japanese, but they share a common ancestor rather. Chinese also has no common root with this group of languages, since in originated in the Yellow River area and belongs to Sino-Tibetan group. Geographically they were rather close to one another, but while speakers of Transeurasian languages practiced millet agriculture, the proto-Chinese practiced rice agriculture, a very significant differentiation factor actually.