some critical notes on Vovin book

fragments of Alexander Vovin book can be seen here  http://books.google.ru/books?id=8w1_cCWIpEoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=A+Reconstruction+of+Proto-Ainu&source=bl&ots=UUXkGvea5H&sig=UIlHf84S_HCLR1ogKT0AUzSZoYg&hl=ru&ei=rO0ZTYvMNYmdOpPniOMI&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAQ

and here can be seen an abstract: http://linguistics.byu.edu/classes/ling450...eports/ainu.htm

 first some notes of anthropological character:

Alexander Vovin, who reconstructed the phonology and the vocabulary of Proto-Ainu, has the view that Ainu language came from Southeast Asia. After completing his comparative studies on Proto-Ainu and Southeast Asian languages, Vovin states that the most distinctive characteristics of Ainu from neighbor languages, such as Korean or Gilyak, are those of the initial consonant cluster and the rich vowel systems. Through the reconstruction of Proto-Ainu, Vovin found that Proto-Ainu had a richer vowel system than modern Ainu, and that several initial consonant clusters (pr-, tr-, hr-,ty- and hd) had been lost in modern Ainu (Vovin 1993, 176). These characteristics of a rich vowel system and consonant clusters are not common to North-Asia.
   
    Vovin's reconstruction of Proto-Ainu vowel systems (Vovin 1993, 42)
   
    Another important evidence Vovin indicates are the Proto-Ainuís distinctive features of front /a/ and back /A/; these can not be found anywhere in North-Asia. Another point is both Proto-Ainu and modern Ainu have initial /r/ features that do not exist in north-Asia languages (Vovin 1993, 156). However, all these characteristics we have seen above are common in Southeast Asia.

the main critical note is that Vovin pays no attention to structural aspects. Ainu language may be a distant relative of a certain language of a certain SEA languages but should be shown more serious prooves of it, not only phonological and lexical similarities. should be shown structural similarities such as similarity of type of linear model of word form, similarity of structure of verb paradigm. cause language is not a heap of lexemes but is first of all a system of structures. so considering any linguistic question we are to pay most attention to the structure but not to lexics or phonology.

Vovin also used cultural similarities to support his hypothesis of the relation between Ainu and Southeast Asia and saying;
Besides the cult of the bear, which is definitely of Siberian origin

such a rite as bear feast appears amny times completely independently among different cultures which practise hunting as main economic activity, this rite can't be of Siberian or some else origin, it is invented many times in different places by different people and it can't be proof of contacts. the thought that bear feast can be a proof of origin is a very tipical thought of dull-witted diffusionists.

the Ainu also had the cult of the snake, which definitely preceded the former. The cult of the snake is not seen in Siberia, but it is widespread in Southeast Asia.

I have never met any 'cult of snake' in Ainu culture. according to common Ainu conceptions snake is an evil being so there could't be any cult of it. I think that it's just a mistake of an early explorers of Ainu culture (may be Leo Sternberg), but this mistake migrates from one text to another of those "anthropologists" who have really dim imagination of Ainu culture.

The same is the case with the cult of the sword, which also has a definite Southern origin.

if "cult of swords" really existed in Ainu culture it was developed in a quite late epoch ~ in the middle of the first millenium AD when metal industries was brought to the land of Ainu; so it is absolutely not clear how this "swords cult" can be connected with a hypothetical Ainu urheimat in South-East Asia which they have left many thousand years ago when it was not known not only manufacture of swords, but also manufacture of metals.

Neighboring Manchu-Tungus people and the Nivkh use the compound bow, while the Ainu used the simple bow that again is typical for Southeast Asia.

This statement also should be checked.
bow also is one those things which were invented many times independently in different cultures. Ainu obviously invented their bow after they left their urheimat. so any attempts of exposing of any realtionship between the shape of Ainu bow and some these of SEA definetely have no sense.

None of the Ainu neighbors used the loin-cloth as the only garment during the summer

And this is simply wrong.
the Nivkh and the Itelmen use loin-cloth.

and none of them used poison arrow. All these features exist only in the far more southern regions (Vovin 1993, 162).

One more diffusionism obscure. vegetable poison is well know to Aleut who live much more northward. vegetable poison was invented many timed in different cultures and use of it obviously can't be proof of Southern origin.

Instead of real anthroplogical prooves Vovin uses some old diffusionism delusions, while real prooves of SEA origin of Ainu are the following:
1) most of Ainu have Y-haplogroup D 2 which is widely spread in SEA and SA and is not known in NEA.
2) the fact that most ancient Jomon sites are in southern islands of Japanese archipelago so that Ainu moved from the South.

Then it should be noted that actually Vovin has taken an attempt to reconstruction not Proto-Ainu but a quite late Upper-Jomon language (about 500 - 1000 B.C.)
Proto-Ainu is Ainu language of pre-Jomon epoch (about 15000 BC and more) and it's can't be reconstructed in principle.

Then how can be in Proto-Ainu lexicon such a late borrowings from Japanese as noko - 'saw', and ita - 'lumber' and kani - 'steel', 'metal'? It seems that Jomon people knew metal industry and manufactured lumbers. LOL with capital letter L!

 Then why word kamuy is in Proto-Ainu lexicon if Vovin states that it's a borrowing from Old Japanese?

Also there is some objection on Vovin's reconstruction of Proto-Ainu phonology. Vovin writes:

He's thought is the following:
1) in all dialects 'w' corresponds to 'w' and only in Krasheninnikov and Klaproth materials 'w' of other dialects corresponds to 'g'/'gu';
2) then having noted that 'w' quite rare occurs in initial position Vovin makes a conclusion that in Ancient Ainu sound 'w' didn't exist.
3) then after data of Krasheninnikov and Klaproth he comes to a conclusion that in Ancient Ainu existed a claster 'hw' or 'gu' and that sound 'w' has developed from this claster, but as far as he made a presupposition that in Ancient Ainu 'w' didn't exist then there should be an another sound in that cluster
4) and finally this sound has been found: analysing the opposition of  w - s: iwan, ihguoen - tu-p-e-san, sine-p-e-san Vovin states the existence of hd cluster and states that after 'h' 'd' has become 'w' while in intervocal position has become 's'.

My objections here are the following:
1) can we rely on materials of Krasheninnikov and Klaproth? are they reliable enough basement for reconstruction of phonology system. I think no.
2) 'w' is pretty often in initial position, but there it is mostly written as 'u'. really 'w' should be bound with 'u'. they are variants of one phonema.
3) cluster hd is much more unnatural and difficult than 'w'. I hardly can image that Ancient Ainu had it instead of 'w'.
4) I suspect that roots 'san' and 'wan' in iwan, tu-p-e-san, sine-p-e-san are related. they seems to be different. I think that there are no roots wan - 'ten' in tu-p-e-san, sine-p-e-san, I think that here we have root san < sa-an - 'to descend', 'to go down'.

Ainu - Jomon relationship prooves by Neil Gordon Munro

Neil Gordon Munro Prehistoric Japan 1911:

p.: 665

The main points advanced against the Ainu origin of the primitive sites were that they did not make pottery, nor use stone implements and pit dwellings; the patterns on their wooden implements were supposed to exhibit little or no resemblance to those of neolithic pottery. Later research, however, has proved that pit dwellings have been used by the Ainu of Saghalin and the Kuriles, that they have

p. 666

used pottery and stone implements and that difference between the patterns of the Ainu and of the stone phase is less than has been stated, and can be readily accounted for.


p. 668
The failure of philology to establish an Aryan race warns us that language shares with the gross vestiges

p. 669
of culture the stigma of unrealiability. When, therefore, we find many localities where shellheaps exist bearing names traceable to Ainu roots, we can only assume that persons using the same language as the Ainu were formerly established in such places.


Ōmori, for instance, is generally supposed to be of Japanese origin, and to refer to a large wood or forest. But in suggesting that the name of this locality (which derives special interest from having been the firts shellmound in Japan to yield up its treasures to scientific reserach) comes from two Ainu words '[i]O[/i]' "projecting" and [i]Mori[/i] a "little hill", I am stating a topographical fact of much interest to a primitive people. A rising ground in the neighbourhood of the sea was of prime importance to the shell-mound builders. Here the village was safe from tidal waves and enjoyed a better strategical position than if built on the lower levels.

p. 672
... by the comparison of individual

p. 673
features that i established the identity of Japanese shellmound and Ainu crania and was led to the conclusion that they are of the same stock.

Prof. Koganei, who is at present carrying out an investigation of my specimens, has kindly drawn for me diagraphic outlines of No. 2 and an Ainu skull, which I have superimposed, Fig. 420

 (Prehistoric Japan p. 669)


The comparison of two isolated crania, it will be understood, is only made by way of illustration. The same degree of correspondence is not found in all the specimens any more than among the Ainu crania.

日本語の版は　http://tresi-nonno.blogspot.com/2012/06/blog-post_15.html

Ainu in Second Life

My gallery/shop in Uguisu market http://slurl.com/secondlife/Uguisu/112/211/25

etoropa
gallery
ancient Ainu mood



エトロパ
画廊
古代アイヌ気持ち

Instrument attached to my back is tonkori real Ainu tonkori. I was really wonder having found it in SL. This tonkori of SL is much alike that of RL though has only three melodies one of which ain't original Ainu.

Here I am playing tonkori in my gallery:

And here is the shop where I bought tonkori (http://slurl.com/secondlife/Uguisu/74/221/25)

It's a good music instruments shop. All items are pretty realistic and ain't expensive.

kayak roll

my activity pon Second Life
kayak roll in Oceana beach (Infinity island http://slurl.com/secondlife/Infinity%20Island/246/92/22 )

 

Just once upon a time

Just once upon a time

Sine an to ta

(a short story from 'Anuyep' - 'Written things')

Long ago lived among Sakhalin Ainu a young man. Once, when there was a winter, this young man went hunting.  He wandered in the forest for a long time, without meeting any game. By the evening he finally managed to shoot a deer. However the deer was not seriously wounded and it was not possible to catch it up on deep snow. The young man decided to stop on a lodging for the night and to continue prosecution of this deer with a dawn. In the morning the young man went on searches of the deer. Having passed for a while he found out  the deer,  took his bow enclosed an arrow and shot. When he approached to the dead deer he saw that an another's arrow had stuck out of it already. At this moment an unknown girl went out of bushes and told that it was her arrow, and that it was she who had killed the deer. The young man didn't begin to argue and has allowed the girl to take the deer away. He  looked after her when she went through the forest.  Then he turned and quickly went to opposite side. After a while the young came down in a deep and came across someone's ski traces. One trace as the young man defined, belonged to the girl that shot the deer. The second trace obviously belonged to a man. The young man stopped and was motionless for a while listening to the forest... And then sharply turned and went aside opposite to that where conducted ski traces...

Many years later on one of settlements this young man who was a very old man at that time met an old woman who was for some reason seemed his acquaintance. Little by little - they got to talking. And she told him story that many years ago once when there was winter she had shot a wounded deer and had met a young man who had wounded this deer the first, but had allowed her to take it away...

The old man lit up his pipe and began to remember that after he had given that deer, he had turned back and by the noon had come to a deep and had come across two ski traces one of which obviously had belonged to a man... Having come across these traces he had decided to go hunting to another side... The old woman smiled, added to the old man a few tea and told that person who had possessed man's trace, had been her father...

the contemporary condition of ainu language

report on contemporary condition of Ainu langauge and culture by Pepe Mantani:  http://gengo-chan.com/viewtopic.php?id=269  must read 'cause it makes you face the reality.

here I publish just a fragment of the report:

Dangerous Conclusions


Of course 600 people is much better than 15 people of Ethnologue or 5 people of Murasaki. But if we look at percentage we understand that the situation is very pitiful. For example in such ethnicities as Basque or Eskimo speakers are about 60 - 80% of total number. Only such percentage can warrant the maintain and normal existance of language while 3% mean the death of language.
This is not only death of language but also death of culture.
What is culture in our times? What is culture in modern world? What does it mean "culture"? What we mean when we say the word "culture"?
Nowadays when globalization increases when anthropological differences between cultures disappear fast, when almost all cultures use the same technology what can be the basis for identification a person as a member of certain ethnic group?  What can be the root the backbone of a certain cultural tradition?
In the case of Ainu we must not look at the anthropological types because of after centuries of intermarriage with Japanese Ainu mostly lost their original type. We must not look at those who perform so called "traditional Ainu rites" or wear Ainu wearing: most of "traditional Ainu rights" really were invented by Japanese in order to attract tourists (for example famous marimo rite or carving of bear figures).
Culture is not things, is not weraing. Culture is a way of thinking, way of behaiviour. And as far as way of thinking and way of behaviour are very well reflected by language so language is the main root of any culture.
According to Whorf if people use a certain language they adopt certain concepts, certain way of world view, certain way of thinking through this language. Language is the key and the backbone of any cultural traditions.
Because of it in the case of Ainu, I think, it is possible to state the following: really those who identify themselves as Ainu, wear Ainu wearing but cannot speak Ainu must not be treated as Ainu, only those who identify themselves as Ainu and can speak Ainu should be treated as Ainu.
So I think that the real number of Ainu is equal to the number of Ainu speakers.
And then: what is the role of Utari or Foundation for Reservation and Promotion of Ainu Culture? I think that now it can be clearly seen by everybody: the main aim of such organizations is to control Ainu culture. These organizations really are just the continuation of Japanese colonializm. The fact that they grant money to some Ainu just approves our conclusion: all colonial power always distinguish a group in any of colonized ethnicity and grant this group in order to manage control over this ethnicity by this group and in order to prevent any disturbance of their policy.
Those who really know language and can really speak it don't need any material support from any foundations or organizations to speak it. Those who can really speak don't need to organize strange festivals in order to speak.
All the efforts to preserve "traditional Ainu culture" such as museums, ethnographical settlings, festivals, and even such as "Iwor" project - a project of a special reservation where Ainu are supposed to live according to so called "traditional Ainu culture" in the wild nature together with animals for Japanese would be able to research them, all these items are just different kinds of theater.
Ainu are a part of Japanese society: Ainu use vending-machines, Ainu buy food in combinience stores, Ainu like karaoke and pachinko. Moreover, we have to remember that sometimes contemporary Ainu know about their own culture much less than Japanese. Finally, it is hardly possible to manage traditional Ainu existance in contemporary Japan cause such a way of life requires a vast space of wild nature, which are obviously absent in contemporary Japan.
And also should be noted that in our times there are no traditional cultures, cause all so called minorities accept the products of Western civilization and develop their languages for they will be able to express all the subject of contemporary world.
So if sphere of Ainu language use is determined as a language of traditional culture only it is just a theater but not a usual use of language. It is not preservation at all. It is death of language and death of culture.
But if there are somebody who really cares about maintain and development of Ainu language and Ainu culture what measures can be recommended? What have to be done?
First we have to know that no one language can exist without a society cause any language is a social structure. So I think only autonomy can save Ainu language as well as any other human language. So if Japanese government really cares about maintain of Ainu language it has to think seriously about Ainu autonomy. This autonomy must not be such a project like "Iwor" or an "ethnographical settling" it should be such an autonomy where Ainu language would be used in normal everyday life: in a railway station, in a shop, in a bar et.c. So I think it would be better to make Ainu refuse their traditional culture and start to manage modern industry for they will beable to get money and an influence on contemporary Japan. Then having got money Ainu would be able to buy lands of their ancestors and it would be "Aynu Mosiri" which is so much spoken about, having got money Ainu would be able to set their own education system where they really will learn Ainu. I think if Japanese government really cares about Ainu it has to grant much more rights to Ainu people, to Ainu communities; also the status of Ainu language has to be changed. Really, I think, there is no need of an independent state but there obviously is a necessity of a wide autonomy inside of Japanese state.
But unfortunately Ainu themselves cannot understand it and also cannot do anything. They are so depraved that they cannot act. If they were Basque they have already got everything. But Ainu are not fighters. Unfortunately since long ago they aren't fighters. Now they cannot act. They misunderstand that if they don't act nobody acts instead of them. They are just like bear who sits in the cage and waits for candies. A bear who forget that he is a bear, that he can easily break the cage. All the contemporary Ainu culture is such a bear in cage.