Abbreviations: myo = million years old; tya = thousand years ago
Link has images related to essay below
http://www.beforebc.de/all_america/900_america/02-16-800-00-21.html
(over 200 web pages at www.BeforeBC.de ; archeology related to
Africana studies):
[A] Bushman Mother Language from 100,000 years ago? Earlier?
In Click Languages, an Echo of the Tongues of the Ancients, Nicholas
Wade of the New York Times said that that ancient African language
over 90 tyo may contain the seeds found in all future languages. (NYT,
March 18, 2003). Continuing in the same vein, in Current Biology (also
18 March 2003) Stanford scientists Alec Knight, Peter Underhill, and
Merritt Ruhlen, wrote that key African Click Languages were spoken by
Bushmen who separated over 100 tya.
If one considers that Australia and China both have monolinguistic
tribal names in common found in Africa such as Kung, Mau, and Jang
among many others (and agglutinated languages arose [?] from their
monosyllabic language), and that both places were populated over 60
tya from Africa, then this makes the claim that Click Language is the
Mother of all Tongues all the more interesting. This is because both
the ithyphallic black stick-figure man in Europe [II:C] from 25 tya
(an African art type found in the hieroglyphics and rock art
worldwide) and steatophygous woman from Siberia 22 tya [II:D], both
are almost assuredly African Bushmen.
Significant corroborative evidence from the same 100 tya period is the
following African-North European connection written-up in Nature.
David Reich re****ts his team "...studied 96 Yorubans (from Nigeria),
believed to share common ancestry with northern Europeans about
100,000 years ago [because they show] ... the same allelic
combinations." (See: Nature, 10 May 2001). For the preceding, compare
Russian [IA] and East African [IB] pictures; pre-50,000 years ago is
the era of the Bushman.
[B] Tools made by Homo Habilis "Bushman" 2.5 mya capable of speaking?
Consider that the meat-scraping tool in the yellow box has an
identical form from 2.5 mya in Africa through 25 tya in Siberia and 15
tya in Japan. Why is the preceding significant? Linguists studying
neurology believe that language developed in and simultaneous with the
brain stimulated by tool-making and tool-using Homo habilis. (see
papers of Alinei,Tobias, Gibbons, etc in EUROPAEA, Journal of
Europaenists, 1997, III/1); Nariokotome [II:A] was H. habilis.
If a form remains constant, I believe its idea does. And if animal
species can form common "words / sounds" for specific things (which
they do) early man must have had a permanent word for the "idea" of
"scraper" [I:A, B] and all other things of his environment (e.g. the
flat reindeer-calf shoulder blade incised upon long, long ago by
shaman and called "lap" or "page." Page is still called "lap" in
Hungary today. Early man must have had language: a language containing
daily objects and the things of his environment.
If the evidence is interpreted, scientists say Nariokotome [II:A] of
Kenya from 2.0 mya was ancestral to Dmanisi of the USSR [II:B] of 1.8
mya and both are Homo habilis with Dmanisi making Oldowan tools that
"Nariokotome people" did. And scientists say they (H. habilis) could
speak; Nariokotome would have been a "Bushman" as it was only
"Bushmen" in Africa during his time. If so, it was Click Language that
Nariokotome's descendents took to Eurasia (clicks lost over deca-
millenniums since). As Africans are, like those on this page,
individuals (color aside) with a combination of being more long than
round-headed and having full noses and mouths and wiry hair, it was
they who formed this Mother Tongue ancestral to those spoken today.
Best regards,
Marc Wa****ngton
www.BeforeBC.de
|
