Semitic - pannous/hieros GitHub Wiki

In the first half of the 20th century, leading linguists promoted the theory that Semitic and Indoeuropean are related. This theory came out of favor in the second half, due to scientific reasons, but likely also due to politics.

Many linguists still note that some special phenomenon might have occurred during or after the Neolithic, but the exact nature connecting some aspects and vocabulary of both families remain unclear. After all, paleogenetic studies revealed that PIE, whether originating around the Volga or around the Caucasus, had at least 50% of their genetic substrate derived from CHG, bringing both families in ever closer physical proximity.

What is the Semitic equivalent of the Yamnaya or Sredni Stog cultures? There's no easy answer here, though I think a good start would be to look at the use of nawamis-type tombs, desert kites, donkey burials, rock art and arsenical copper exploitation in Late Chalcolithic Sinai and Southern Levant and put this in parallel with their dispersion as well as the appearance of similar cairn-like tombs in the rest of the region during the Early Bronze Age (the Hafit period in the Gulf being a prime example of this type of correlation).

In the case of the Levant and Arabia the Northern invader J1-P58 branches brought the Iranian Ancestry as we know.
Sometimes conquerors can also adopt the local language of the conquered people, just like the Manchu in China (Chinese), the Norman in France (Norman French, the Norman invasion of England also transformed and adopted the Middle English in some aspects) or the Barbarian invasions in most of the Roman Empire (Romance Languages), whenever conquerors meet rich agricultural organized civilizations, just like the J1 invasion of Semitic speaking societies adopting the conquered local languages (Semitic is an Afroasiatic language from Africa not from the original/basal J1 native homelands), the language can change. J1 is always associated with CHG/Iran in the steppe and J1 can be one of the vectors of the Indo-Anatolian and PIE languages.

The Semitic custom of treating all names with 'Ja' as semitic seems like a cheap trick.
It's like saying that He=God therefore Heracles must mean 'God' + r-c-l (whatever word you find: God-recalls ...). This custom is very unsatisfying (and in most cases likely wrong). Names should not be used to identify the ethnics of Kings.

A paradoxon of genetics called the extended Charlemagne Paradoxon is that after a couple thousand years all humans are genetically related, which might correlate with some linguistic drift or flow.

𓇋 𓄿 𓅱 𓀀 𓏪 vi.air.on > Hiero = Old < gero

Erde ⇔ ard@Semitic 𐌰𐌹𐍂𐌸𐌰 airþa 𓇯𓏏 garden E'den 𓁷𓂋𓏏𓇯
Germanic and Semitic words are surprisingly similar. Maybe a loanword?

Problem being, as you trace the origins of the words back through their known etymologies, they become more different instead of similar.

This may be true for some winded branches of the language word tree, however the general picture is (or should be) that semitic have too much vocabulary and structural overlap to be merely a contact phenomenon:

كيفك يا محمد؟
Quė faica ya Mohamed
How do you do Mohamed?

The list of corresponding words is significant

https://github.com/pannous/hieros/blob/master/dicts/swadesh/SEMITIC.tsv

Jakobiner