![]() | A fact from People of Assam appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 26 December 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
Would it be appropriate for me to add the map from Assam here? It's probable that a lot of readers would benefit from visual information on the region's location. I'll do so in the next several days if there are no objections. Adlerschloß 22:08, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Deepraj 13:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Is the "ethic groups" of the Info box complete? What about Mising, Rabha, Tea Tribes etc? Bikram98 ( talk) 08:25, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
This page is very biased against Ahoms... Had they been so cruel, how come other castes and tribes so easily integrated into one community? The ahom even honoured Brahmins by giving the post of Phukan of Ahom/Assamese kingdom. They peacefully assimilated Barahi tribe into Ahom, and many people from other tribes and castes including Kalita, Brahmin etc. The last names (Bora, Borua, Saikia, Hazarika, Phukan, Gohain) of different tribes, including Muslim people states it pretty much, how similarly they were treated along with the Ahom subjects ...
Where's the reference of these claims against Ahoms?
Assamese society and culture no doubt is from pre-historical era, but, it is quite well know, how the todays integrated Assamese society and culture came to exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.139.236.210 ( talk) 08:09, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:Assamgirl.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Assamgirl.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 20:11, 23 February 2012 (UTC) |
I propose that the page Assamese people be merged into People of Assam. Both the articles are discussing same topic. Marlisco ( talk) 04:46, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Well, the intent of both of the articles need to be first understood!
Assamese people is an article that speaks about people from Assam region - Brahmaputra Valley, whose primary language is Asamiya or Assamese and thereby, the lineage is determined by the spoken first language Asamiya. It includes Assamese Brahmins (Indo-Aryan group), Ahoms (Indo-Mongoloid group), Kalitas, Assamese Sikhs, Assamese Muslims and all other groups whose first language is Assamese that in turn associate them with the culture, tradition and history of Assam. These groups may be migrant from different regions in the ancient period however, all of them had imbibed this language and commonly associate with it without any ambiguity. e.g., Assamese Sikhs don't even know a word of Punjabi as the common language they associate is Assamese and follow the Assamese code of conduct regarding food, social discipline and dress. But they are aware of their Sikh identity and do wear the five Ks. [1] In fact the Sikh community went in search of their history to Punjab however, their lineage is more embedded with Brahmaputra Valley as for the language - Assamese. The same analogy also applies to Brahmins, Muslims and others who speak Assamese.
People of Assam is a categorization within which 'Assamese people' (Assamese language speakers of Brahmaputra valley) constitutes a part. 'People of Assam' is an aggregate of Assamese people along with people from other regions of mainland Assam hills and plains - Barak Valley and Hill Districts who may strikingly differ both ethnically and linguistically. e.g., Bodo tribe speaks Bodo within the autonomous district of Bodoland, Mising, Motok, Sutiya have their own dialect variants and traditionally don't identify themselves as Assamese, as they don't contribute to the language family of Asamiya nor they may follow Assamese code of conduct regarding food, social discipline and dress. In Barak Valley, the primary language is Sylheti in spite of it being in Assam where the first official language is Assamese in most of the regions.
Thereby, 'People of Assam' is anyone belonging to the state of Assam that constitutes the Brahmaputra and Barak River Valleys, and the Hills; and the article cites anyone irrespective of the language family as a representative of that region.
There's no categorization under Wikipedia category as Asamiya or Assamese people unlike Tamilians or Punjabis with the justification that unlike other regions of India, Assam owing to its mixed demographics everyone is not Assamese and tribes and sub-tribes along with a few other communities identify themselves as separate and non-assamese as they may not align with the traditions and culture of Brahmaputra Valley, in general. Though that categorization existed, it was deleted with that reasoning!
So, as an approach; either a categorization be created like 'Bengali people', 'Gujrati people' and then remove the 'People of Assam' article or else retain both the articles as it is now. You cannot mix everything up! No categorization and also merging articles - both cannot be done! Undo one of these to do the other.
For Assamese people a Wikipedia categorization in the same name makes sense because of the groups who associate with the language family - Assamese and are a part of common Assamese code of conduct regarding food, social discipline and dress of Brahmaputra Valley. It is unfair not have a category for them and have that for every other community in India.
Please think! It's easy to put a proposal however, sometimes make an effort to understand the crux of it. I recommend to create a Category as Assamese people and not to merge these articles!
-- Rex86 ( talk) 23:01, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 07:54, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
The HbE frequency tables are not relevant in the article, since the frequencies are determined by other factors (rainfall etc.) and interaction with other alleles. I am parking the tables here for a discussion, if needed. Here is an example of how HbE could increase in a population from less than 10% to more than 40% in about 50 years. "An increase in HbE among the Totos of Assam-West Bengal (from 0.099 in 1962 to 0.438 in 2013) with the high incidence of consanguineous marriages may also support the present conjecture." (p256)
S.No | Population
from Assam |
N(Sample size) | HbE
Frequency |
Source |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Ahom | 125 | 0.304 | Balgir 1995 |
2 | Boro | 131 | 0.549 | Das et al. 1980 |
3 | Chutia | 62 | 0.3 | Deka et al. 1980 |
4 | Garo | 135 | 0.5 | Das et al. 1980 |
5 | Karbi | 110 | 0.227 | Deka et al. 1988 |
6 | Koch Rajbongshi | 164 | 0.35 | History of Assam by Edward Albert Gait 1906
Das & Deka 1980 |
7 | Mishing | 318 | 0.403 | Sharma and Mahanta 2009 |
8 | Sonowal | 106 | 0.396 | Deka et al. 1988 |
9 | Tiwa | 27 | 0.315 | Balgir 1995 |
S.No | Population
from Assam |
N(Sample size) | HbE
Frequency |
Source |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Assamese Brahmins | 98 | 0.051 | Deka 1988 |
2 | Assamese Muslims | 155 | 0.158 | Ahmed Das 1994 |
3 | Assamese Sikhs | 107 | 0.209 | Sharma Mahanta 2013 |
4 | Kaibarta | 101 | 0.133 | Deka et al. 1988 |
5 | Kalita | 104 | 0.115 | Deka 1988 |
6 | Sut | 22 | 0.023 | Balgir 1995 |
Chaipau (
talk)
11:33, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Other factors decrease the mutation frequency, it cannot create new mutations. Study biology first. External factors cannot create any mutation. Presence of mutation means presence of AA genes 2409:4065:E96:261F:4C97:65EB:A420:C75A ( talk) 08:35, 30 May 2020 (UTC).
Your viewpoint doesn't matter. This is a public platform. All studies are to be included. As already stated, HbE mutation was generated in the AA population. External factors cannot create mutation in any random population out of thin air. If that were so, all ethnic groups including caste Assamese groups living in humid Assam should be having the mutation. 2409:4065:E96:261F:4C97:65EB:A420:C75A ( talk) 08:48, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
All research has equal value. Someone's POV doesn't matter here. 2409:4065:E96:261F:4C97:65EB:A420:C75A ( talk) 09:05, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Toto is a Tibeto-Burman group with AA blood as well. Thus, it is mentioned that frequency in Totos have increased due to consanguineous marriages. Mutations may increase due to consanguineous marriage or can decrease due to environmental factors. But, the fact remains that HbE mutation is linked with AA genes. Like Totos, most Brahmins or other caste Assamese groups also undergo consanguineous marriages due to which their frequencies haven't increased. On the other hand, most of the Tibeto-Burmans have maintained their numbers too. 2409:4065:E96:261F:4C97:65EB:A420:C75A ( talk) 09:13, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Agree with User:Chaipau, the additions by the IP editor are a blatant misrepresentation of the source, e.g.:
– Austronesier ( talk) 15:43, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
https://www.academia.edu/38616517/A_Genomic_study_on_Austro_Asiatic_and_Tibeto_Burman_Speakers_in_Northeast_India_pointing_towards_late_Neolithic_to_Bronze_Age_dispersals_from_South_East_Asia, Though it's independent research, it's useful to understand the past. Logical Man 2000 ( talk) 15:13, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
1. Upper bound for all other groups and lower bound for Tibeto-Burman group isn't neutral point of view. 2. Assam belongs to Tibeto-Burman zone. Assam is directly connected to Himalayan range. Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land. 2409:4065:D8E:665F:540F:2AF:684E:4F1D ( talk) 06:42, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
"Assam belongs to Tibeto-Burman zone [...] Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land"? – Austronesier ( talk) 12:59, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
First of all, This is not diagram of neutral point of view. Lower limit for TB and upper limit for others isn't acceptable. Secondly, Assam is link between Tibet and Burma. If you can draw a diagram based on other sources than you can also infer "Assam belongs to Tibeto-Burman zone [...] Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land"
from geography and other sources. Thirdly, Everybody evolved from Out of Africa people. Tibet is much closer than southeast Asia.
2402:3A80:DD5:E3B2:CAA8:B7A3:66C0:91D9 (
talk)
14:31, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
"Assam belongs to Tibeto-Burman zone [...] Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land"? – Austronesier ( talk) 14:55, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
"Assam belongs to Tibeto-Burman zone [...] Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land"? None, right? – Austronesier ( talk) 15:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Why lower bound for TB and upper bound for others ? You have no answer, right? Don't waste your time in Wikipedia to spread lies. 2402:3A80:DD7:DA77:371E:2316:C228:FDBA ( talk) 15:30, 5 June 2020 (UTC) Expected upper bound for TB is 4000-5000 years ago. Bhaskar varman claimed to come from China 4000 years ago. 2402:3A80:DD7:DA77:371E:2316:C228:FDBA ( talk) 15:32, 5 June 2020 (UTC) Point 1. was original problem. Point 2. is just for imagining the situation. 2402:3A80:DD7:DA77:371E:2316:C228:FDBA ( talk) 15:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
"Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land", and all of a sudden you produce another unsourced and contradictive claim for TB having migrated from outside of Assam at 3k-2k BCE. – Austronesier ( talk) 15:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Comolain box Chaipau, Go check original copper plate. Bhaskar Varman claim his origin from Cakrabhrta or Visnu God. Austronesier, People who came from China must be Chinese, not Tibetan. Bhutan was also part of Tibet. Tibet and Assam is closer than Southeast Asia and Assam. Bhaskar Varman is from 7th century. He claimed 4000 years ago. It means 700 A.D - 4000 = 3300B.C. , My question is why lower limit for TB and upper limit for other groups. It's biased and against TBs of Assam 2409:4065:E93:4B7B:CD94:D737:5E09:7724 ( talk) 16:01, 5 June 2020 (UTC) You two are sock puppet of each other. You'll be blocked very soon by unbiased Admins. 2409:4065:E93:4B7B:CD94:D737:5E09:7724 ( talk) 16:12, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Any unbiased person will say that Lower limit of one group and Upper limit for other groups is biased edit. 2409:4065:E93:4B7B:CD94:D737:5E09:7724 ( talk) 16:22, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
If you're incompetent to give any justification for your biased and useless edits then don't waste time here. 2402:3A80:DC1:21A0:31E9:5ADB:C2E0:9685 ( talk) 16:52, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
"on the ground of author having own wikipedia page". A detailed WP page is dedicated to Athanasius Kircher, and yet his Oedipus Aegyptiacus is not a reliable source for a proper understanding of Egyptian hieroglyphs. Older sources are reliable if their content is critically reviewed and corroborated by modern scholarly peer-review sources. – Austronesier ( talk) 18:26, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, Chaipau, you have engaged with these people admirably and at great length. Page protection would be a good start. Further admin intervention may be required. Richard Keatinge ( talk) 20:04, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Simple English sentence - Upper bound for other groups and lower bound for Tibeto-Burman group isn't neutral point of view. 2402:3A80:DEC:75A8:5127:D6E4:1200:73B0 ( talk) 21:39, 5 June 2020 (UTC) If you ( @ Austronesier: , @ Richard Keatinge: ) are not biased and blind then can you ask Chaipau for this ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/960416740 ) type of disruptive edits. He removed sourced and historical fact. Yesterday, Chaipau also agreed that Boro were known as Mech ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/960538538 ). Why is he so much against Boro people ? All of his edits go against Boro people 2402:3A80:DD6:7520:4E45:E0F4:F188:F00C ( talk) 22:09, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
On a whim I went checking—it seems I started Boro people some sixteen years ago. It will be sixteen in about three weeks. That was my third edit on Wikipedia. This was the version then: [3]. My second edit on Wikipedia was to correct the definition of the Bodos—then it was defined as a rebel group and I think I corrected it to mean a people [4], who were struggling to maintain their language and identity. I probably created the Bodo (community) page after creating the red-link in the Bodo page, which later on moved to finally rest at "Boro people." Much water has flown down the Brahmaputra, it seems. Now we have a sock declaring "All his edits go against Boro people". My only regret is that even after sixteen years, Boro people is in a very sorry state. It has the look of a battlefield where terrible wars were fought, the grounds soaked in blood—what we wanted instead was a lush green field with nice trees, or maybe a few beautiful buildings. (Sorry for this bit of nostalgia---the curious thing was then, in 2004, we didn't know much about references and citations!) Chaipau ( talk) 01:04, 6 June 2020 (UTC) Huh, 16 years ago , You tried to increase your edit count but now you become a dominant and arrogant. You're also attacking the Identity. It's clearly visible from your edits. Now, same goes for your community , Read Struggling to be Tai-Ahom in India by Yasmin Saikia. 2402:3A80:DC4:2D56:589B:4E6D:5BA:987C ( talk) 05:06, 6 June 2020 (UTC) We're not struggling to maintain anything. Languageless cultureless communities like Chaipau's community are fighting against Boro to erase our History, Language and Culture. It's because they have taken everything from us. Mastermind like Chaipau are creator of all the conflict in Assam. 2409:4065:99:BFAA:BCFA:5B83:6DE6:76B4 ( talk) 05:20, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
If you can't be unbiased then don't waste your time. 42.108.36.85 ( talk) 12:42, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
Personal attack is not acceptable in any case. The editor is in two minds, e.g. he stresed above "Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere.They are already in own land", also claimed "Boro means great man, Borofisa means Son of the great man. We were Chinese immigrants". भास्कर् Bhagawati संवाद 00:48, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
@ Drmies: The ew IP is most likely a sock of User:Sairg. – Austronesier ( talk) 15:48, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Many of the statements in the article are extremely disputed but going by the article, seem like objective facts. The entire section of People_of_Assam#Austroasiatic is a good example. TrangaBellam ( talk)
@
Chaipau and
Austronesier:
Taher, Guha and others of the 20th century shouldn't be used for the population history of the neolithic period. Their claims are based on guesswork or incorrect understanding of the past. Northeast heritage ( talk) 02:04, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
As assam is multiethnic state comprising of diverse indigenous culture and languages which were born and developed in the place that spread to entire northeast region post division of northeast era into different states, the priority of languages in the languages box should be given to the indigenous languages rather than languages which came later or not originating from assam or northeastern india.জয় আই অসম Metei91 ( talk) 16:16, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
@ Dev0745: please provide reliable sources for your edits here. The current sources do not support the new peoples you have identified. Also, please do not back-project current ethnic identities to the times of their relocation. The list is also not required to be exhaustive here, and the link is provided for the full article. Thanks. Chaipau ( talk) 08:47, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Adivasiya is a new name given by the Sabha for the creole. In their opinion, Sadri spoken in Jharkhand is the language of the Sadans or the Dikhus, literally meaning ‘outsider’. Sadri, spoken in Assam, is essentially different. The reason behind this is that, it is the product of heterogenous ethnic groups who came together to use it as a link language for socio-cultural reasons. Thus, Assam Sadri is essentially different from Nagpuria Sadri (Nagpuria) and other varieties spoken in different parts of the country." Chaipau ( talk) 09:42, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Kurukh(Dravidian) and Odia(Indo-Aryan) also spoken in Tea garden. But Provided reference only talk about adivasi, their language family i.e Dravidian and Austro-asiatic and don't mention their ethnic groups. So I am ok with it if u remove it. But they are mentioned in Tea garden community of Assam article. Dev0745 ( talk) 09:41, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Chaipau:, Why are you removing my edits. The two sources clearly mention it is Assam Sadri and Bagania. Is central government or state govt have recognised adivasia language? The Sabha don't own any language that is their not own. Scholar have not used Adivasia word for Assam Sadri. They have used Assam Sadri and Bagania. The name Adivasia is propaganda of tribal who are not the traditional speakers of the Sadri language. They should not be given priority as it is not their language. Scholar of languages should be given priority. Dev0745 ( talk) 16:07, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
As your wish. But put scholarly view. Dev0745 ( talk) 17:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks Dev0745 ( talk) 04:34, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
@ 2409:4088:9c09:183b::8288:6715 and @ 103.192.116.194 could you please explain why you had removed the text: [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]
These are properly cited relevant texts.
@ Tantomile, 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, and ComparingQuantities: - since you have restored the text on at least one instance. @ El C: - for admin visibility.
Chaipau ( talk) 22:11, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
@ El C: I am submitting this by way of resolution to the issue whether the DeLancey claim on creolization is WP:DUE on not:
Meanwhile, the bearers of Y-chromosomal haplogroup O2a2b1 (M134) in the eastern Himalayan region expanded eastward throughout Sìchuān and Yúnnán, north and northwest across the Tibetan plateau as well as further westward across the Himalayas and southward into the Indo-Burmese borderlands. On the Brahmaputra plain, the early Trans-Himalayans encountered the Austroasiatics, who had preceded them. The relative frequencies of the Ychromosomal haplogroup O1b1a1a (M95) in Trans-Himalayan speaking populations of the Indian subcontinent (Sahoo et al. 2006, Reddy et al. 2007, Gaziet al. 2013) suggest that a subset of the paternal ancestors of some Trans-Himalayan populations in northeastern India, e.g. certain Bodo-Koch communities, may originally have been Austroasiatic speakers with matriarchal, matrilinear or matrilocal societies, who were linguistically assimilated by Trans-Himalayans, providing a molecular genetic correlate for the ancient process of creolisation argued for by DeLancey (2014).
— George van Driem, Ethnolinguistic Prehistory (2021, p199)
Since the deleted DeLancey claims are mentioned by van Driem in this very context, the text is definitely WP:DUE.
The IP editor has not responded and Austronesier too has asked the text to be restored since the deletion was opposed by many editors, the text deserves to be restored.
@ Tantomile, 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, ComparingQuantities, and Northeast heritage:.
Chaipau ( talk) 20:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
"The Y haplogroup 02a is represented at a frequency of 77% in Austroasiatic groups in India and 47% in Tibeto-Burman groups of northeastern India. This patterning could suggest that Tibeto-Burman paternal lineages may have partially replaced indigenous Austroasiatic lineages in the northeast of the Indian Subcontinent and that Austroasiatic populations preceded the Tibeto-Burmans in this area, as linguists and ethnographers have speculated for over a century and a half."
DeLancey (2012) argues that Proto-Boro-Garo may have in fact developed as a lingua franca within the Brahmaputra valley; we find this thesis compelling, as it would explain both the modern-day distribution of Boro-Garo languages and their simplified morphological profile by comparison with their more conservative Northern Naga neighbours." (Post & Burling 2017:227)
When Tibeto-Burman-speaking people moved down into the Valley, they can never have been as numerous as the indigenous inhabitants, who had the food resources of the Valley to grow populous on. The Tibeto-Burmification of the Valley must have been more a matter of the language replacement than wholesale population replacement.
A serial decrease in expansion time from east to west: 5.7±0.3 Kya in Laos, 5.2±0.6 in Northeast India, and 4.3±0.2 in EastIndia, suggested a late Neolithic east to west spread of the lineage O2a1-M95 from Laos.
I think nobody who knows me even just a bit will be surprised when I say that I don't see any merit in joining discussions that have things like In 2007, Austroasiatics wasn't clearly understood. Only in 2011, Chaubey et al rectified Austroasiatic haplogroup.
C'mon, "Austroasiatic haplogroup"??? The correlation of genetics and linguistic affiliation is often tenuous, but the identification of Y-haplogroups with language families is utter BS. I'm otherwise on good terms with van Driem, but his father tongue hypothesis is complete rubbish. Just think of it: after only 10 generations, a person's Y-haplogroup tells us something about only one out of one thousand twenty-four of that's person's ancestors! Can anyone seriously believe that the other 1023 ancestors haven't taken a significant part in shaping the history of that individual? As for the rest, I'll have look at the relevant sources (NB the really relevant ones). –
Austronesier (
talk)
15:52, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
@ Northeast heritage: keeping in mind WP:NOTFORUM, I think we are best served if we work on specific changes to improve the article. Could you start a new section for that? We could keep this section to discuss the deleted paragraph. Chaipau ( talk) 19:23, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
As for the rest, I'll have look at the relevant sources (NB the really relevant ones), So I will wait. Northeast heritage ( talk) 13:58, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
This patterning could suggest that Tibeto-Burman paternal lineages may have partially replaced indigenous Austroasiatic lineages in the northeast of the Indian Subcontinent and that Austroasiatic populations preceded the Tibeto-Burmans in this area, as linguists and ethnographers have speculated for over a century and a half" where by "this patterning" he refers to the distribution of the "Austroasiatic" Y haplogroup in Austroasiatic and Tibeto-Burman speaking populations today.
On the Brahmaputra plain, the early Trans-Himalayans encountered the Austroasiatics, who had preceded them. The relative frequencies of the Ychromosomal haplogroup O1b1a1a (M95) in Trans-Himalayan speaking populations of the Indian subcontinent (Sahoo et al. 2006, Reddy et al. 2007, Gaziet al. 2013) suggest that a subset of the paternal ancestors of some Trans-Himalayan populations in northeastern India, e.g. certain Bodo-Koch communities, may originally have been Austroasiatic speakers with matriarchal, matrilinear or matrilocal societies, who were linguistically assimilated by Trans-Himalayans, providing a molecular genetic correlate for the ancient process of creolisation argued for by DeLancey (2014)"
Removed the text containing the revision by DeLancey (2012), as it's not suitable for the page as per WP:SDESC because it's all about Tibeto-Burman migration and not about Boro-Garo formation, so it's better to keep it concise. 103.44.172.186 ( talk) 16:16, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
It is expected that the Tibeto-Burman peoples were not as numerous as the indigenous Austroasiatic population, and the replacement was of languages and not peoples." So this deletion is definitely WP:DUE because it is about the migration and spread of the Tibeto-Burman speaking peoples, and not merely about the "Boro-Garo formation" as you suggest.
The relative frequencies of the Ychromosomal haplogroup O1b1a1a (M95) in Trans-Himalayan speaking populations of the Indian subcontinent (Sahoo et al. 2006, Reddy et al. 2007, Gaziet al. 2013) suggest that a subset of the paternal ancestors of some Trans-Himalayan populations in northeastern India, e.g. certain Bodo-Koch communities, may originally have been Austroasiatic speakers with matriarchal, matrilinear or matrilocal societies, who were linguistically assimilated by Trans-Himalayans, providing a molecular genetic correlate for the ancient process of creolisation argued for by DeLancey (2014)" Therefore, this claim is not just a claim by one linguist, it is further acknowledged by other linguists and also supported by the genetic data.
(rv. unreliable ref.)". I am at a loss to explain how van Dreim (2007) could be unreliable---you will have to explain this.
![]() | A fact from People of Assam appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 26 December 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
Would it be appropriate for me to add the map from Assam here? It's probable that a lot of readers would benefit from visual information on the region's location. I'll do so in the next several days if there are no objections. Adlerschloß 22:08, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Deepraj 13:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Is the "ethic groups" of the Info box complete? What about Mising, Rabha, Tea Tribes etc? Bikram98 ( talk) 08:25, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
This page is very biased against Ahoms... Had they been so cruel, how come other castes and tribes so easily integrated into one community? The ahom even honoured Brahmins by giving the post of Phukan of Ahom/Assamese kingdom. They peacefully assimilated Barahi tribe into Ahom, and many people from other tribes and castes including Kalita, Brahmin etc. The last names (Bora, Borua, Saikia, Hazarika, Phukan, Gohain) of different tribes, including Muslim people states it pretty much, how similarly they were treated along with the Ahom subjects ...
Where's the reference of these claims against Ahoms?
Assamese society and culture no doubt is from pre-historical era, but, it is quite well know, how the todays integrated Assamese society and culture came to exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.139.236.210 ( talk) 08:09, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:Assamgirl.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Assamgirl.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 20:11, 23 February 2012 (UTC) |
I propose that the page Assamese people be merged into People of Assam. Both the articles are discussing same topic. Marlisco ( talk) 04:46, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Well, the intent of both of the articles need to be first understood!
Assamese people is an article that speaks about people from Assam region - Brahmaputra Valley, whose primary language is Asamiya or Assamese and thereby, the lineage is determined by the spoken first language Asamiya. It includes Assamese Brahmins (Indo-Aryan group), Ahoms (Indo-Mongoloid group), Kalitas, Assamese Sikhs, Assamese Muslims and all other groups whose first language is Assamese that in turn associate them with the culture, tradition and history of Assam. These groups may be migrant from different regions in the ancient period however, all of them had imbibed this language and commonly associate with it without any ambiguity. e.g., Assamese Sikhs don't even know a word of Punjabi as the common language they associate is Assamese and follow the Assamese code of conduct regarding food, social discipline and dress. But they are aware of their Sikh identity and do wear the five Ks. [1] In fact the Sikh community went in search of their history to Punjab however, their lineage is more embedded with Brahmaputra Valley as for the language - Assamese. The same analogy also applies to Brahmins, Muslims and others who speak Assamese.
People of Assam is a categorization within which 'Assamese people' (Assamese language speakers of Brahmaputra valley) constitutes a part. 'People of Assam' is an aggregate of Assamese people along with people from other regions of mainland Assam hills and plains - Barak Valley and Hill Districts who may strikingly differ both ethnically and linguistically. e.g., Bodo tribe speaks Bodo within the autonomous district of Bodoland, Mising, Motok, Sutiya have their own dialect variants and traditionally don't identify themselves as Assamese, as they don't contribute to the language family of Asamiya nor they may follow Assamese code of conduct regarding food, social discipline and dress. In Barak Valley, the primary language is Sylheti in spite of it being in Assam where the first official language is Assamese in most of the regions.
Thereby, 'People of Assam' is anyone belonging to the state of Assam that constitutes the Brahmaputra and Barak River Valleys, and the Hills; and the article cites anyone irrespective of the language family as a representative of that region.
There's no categorization under Wikipedia category as Asamiya or Assamese people unlike Tamilians or Punjabis with the justification that unlike other regions of India, Assam owing to its mixed demographics everyone is not Assamese and tribes and sub-tribes along with a few other communities identify themselves as separate and non-assamese as they may not align with the traditions and culture of Brahmaputra Valley, in general. Though that categorization existed, it was deleted with that reasoning!
So, as an approach; either a categorization be created like 'Bengali people', 'Gujrati people' and then remove the 'People of Assam' article or else retain both the articles as it is now. You cannot mix everything up! No categorization and also merging articles - both cannot be done! Undo one of these to do the other.
For Assamese people a Wikipedia categorization in the same name makes sense because of the groups who associate with the language family - Assamese and are a part of common Assamese code of conduct regarding food, social discipline and dress of Brahmaputra Valley. It is unfair not have a category for them and have that for every other community in India.
Please think! It's easy to put a proposal however, sometimes make an effort to understand the crux of it. I recommend to create a Category as Assamese people and not to merge these articles!
-- Rex86 ( talk) 23:01, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 07:54, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
The HbE frequency tables are not relevant in the article, since the frequencies are determined by other factors (rainfall etc.) and interaction with other alleles. I am parking the tables here for a discussion, if needed. Here is an example of how HbE could increase in a population from less than 10% to more than 40% in about 50 years. "An increase in HbE among the Totos of Assam-West Bengal (from 0.099 in 1962 to 0.438 in 2013) with the high incidence of consanguineous marriages may also support the present conjecture." (p256)
S.No | Population
from Assam |
N(Sample size) | HbE
Frequency |
Source |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Ahom | 125 | 0.304 | Balgir 1995 |
2 | Boro | 131 | 0.549 | Das et al. 1980 |
3 | Chutia | 62 | 0.3 | Deka et al. 1980 |
4 | Garo | 135 | 0.5 | Das et al. 1980 |
5 | Karbi | 110 | 0.227 | Deka et al. 1988 |
6 | Koch Rajbongshi | 164 | 0.35 | History of Assam by Edward Albert Gait 1906
Das & Deka 1980 |
7 | Mishing | 318 | 0.403 | Sharma and Mahanta 2009 |
8 | Sonowal | 106 | 0.396 | Deka et al. 1988 |
9 | Tiwa | 27 | 0.315 | Balgir 1995 |
S.No | Population
from Assam |
N(Sample size) | HbE
Frequency |
Source |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Assamese Brahmins | 98 | 0.051 | Deka 1988 |
2 | Assamese Muslims | 155 | 0.158 | Ahmed Das 1994 |
3 | Assamese Sikhs | 107 | 0.209 | Sharma Mahanta 2013 |
4 | Kaibarta | 101 | 0.133 | Deka et al. 1988 |
5 | Kalita | 104 | 0.115 | Deka 1988 |
6 | Sut | 22 | 0.023 | Balgir 1995 |
Chaipau (
talk)
11:33, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Other factors decrease the mutation frequency, it cannot create new mutations. Study biology first. External factors cannot create any mutation. Presence of mutation means presence of AA genes 2409:4065:E96:261F:4C97:65EB:A420:C75A ( talk) 08:35, 30 May 2020 (UTC).
Your viewpoint doesn't matter. This is a public platform. All studies are to be included. As already stated, HbE mutation was generated in the AA population. External factors cannot create mutation in any random population out of thin air. If that were so, all ethnic groups including caste Assamese groups living in humid Assam should be having the mutation. 2409:4065:E96:261F:4C97:65EB:A420:C75A ( talk) 08:48, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
All research has equal value. Someone's POV doesn't matter here. 2409:4065:E96:261F:4C97:65EB:A420:C75A ( talk) 09:05, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Toto is a Tibeto-Burman group with AA blood as well. Thus, it is mentioned that frequency in Totos have increased due to consanguineous marriages. Mutations may increase due to consanguineous marriage or can decrease due to environmental factors. But, the fact remains that HbE mutation is linked with AA genes. Like Totos, most Brahmins or other caste Assamese groups also undergo consanguineous marriages due to which their frequencies haven't increased. On the other hand, most of the Tibeto-Burmans have maintained their numbers too. 2409:4065:E96:261F:4C97:65EB:A420:C75A ( talk) 09:13, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Agree with User:Chaipau, the additions by the IP editor are a blatant misrepresentation of the source, e.g.:
– Austronesier ( talk) 15:43, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
https://www.academia.edu/38616517/A_Genomic_study_on_Austro_Asiatic_and_Tibeto_Burman_Speakers_in_Northeast_India_pointing_towards_late_Neolithic_to_Bronze_Age_dispersals_from_South_East_Asia, Though it's independent research, it's useful to understand the past. Logical Man 2000 ( talk) 15:13, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
1. Upper bound for all other groups and lower bound for Tibeto-Burman group isn't neutral point of view. 2. Assam belongs to Tibeto-Burman zone. Assam is directly connected to Himalayan range. Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land. 2409:4065:D8E:665F:540F:2AF:684E:4F1D ( talk) 06:42, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
"Assam belongs to Tibeto-Burman zone [...] Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land"? – Austronesier ( talk) 12:59, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
First of all, This is not diagram of neutral point of view. Lower limit for TB and upper limit for others isn't acceptable. Secondly, Assam is link between Tibet and Burma. If you can draw a diagram based on other sources than you can also infer "Assam belongs to Tibeto-Burman zone [...] Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land"
from geography and other sources. Thirdly, Everybody evolved from Out of Africa people. Tibet is much closer than southeast Asia.
2402:3A80:DD5:E3B2:CAA8:B7A3:66C0:91D9 (
talk)
14:31, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
"Assam belongs to Tibeto-Burman zone [...] Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land"? – Austronesier ( talk) 14:55, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
"Assam belongs to Tibeto-Burman zone [...] Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land"? None, right? – Austronesier ( talk) 15:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Why lower bound for TB and upper bound for others ? You have no answer, right? Don't waste your time in Wikipedia to spread lies. 2402:3A80:DD7:DA77:371E:2316:C228:FDBA ( talk) 15:30, 5 June 2020 (UTC) Expected upper bound for TB is 4000-5000 years ago. Bhaskar varman claimed to come from China 4000 years ago. 2402:3A80:DD7:DA77:371E:2316:C228:FDBA ( talk) 15:32, 5 June 2020 (UTC) Point 1. was original problem. Point 2. is just for imagining the situation. 2402:3A80:DD7:DA77:371E:2316:C228:FDBA ( talk) 15:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
"Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere. They are already in own land", and all of a sudden you produce another unsourced and contradictive claim for TB having migrated from outside of Assam at 3k-2k BCE. – Austronesier ( talk) 15:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Comolain box Chaipau, Go check original copper plate. Bhaskar Varman claim his origin from Cakrabhrta or Visnu God. Austronesier, People who came from China must be Chinese, not Tibetan. Bhutan was also part of Tibet. Tibet and Assam is closer than Southeast Asia and Assam. Bhaskar Varman is from 7th century. He claimed 4000 years ago. It means 700 A.D - 4000 = 3300B.C. , My question is why lower limit for TB and upper limit for other groups. It's biased and against TBs of Assam 2409:4065:E93:4B7B:CD94:D737:5E09:7724 ( talk) 16:01, 5 June 2020 (UTC) You two are sock puppet of each other. You'll be blocked very soon by unbiased Admins. 2409:4065:E93:4B7B:CD94:D737:5E09:7724 ( talk) 16:12, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Any unbiased person will say that Lower limit of one group and Upper limit for other groups is biased edit. 2409:4065:E93:4B7B:CD94:D737:5E09:7724 ( talk) 16:22, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
If you're incompetent to give any justification for your biased and useless edits then don't waste time here. 2402:3A80:DC1:21A0:31E9:5ADB:C2E0:9685 ( talk) 16:52, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
"on the ground of author having own wikipedia page". A detailed WP page is dedicated to Athanasius Kircher, and yet his Oedipus Aegyptiacus is not a reliable source for a proper understanding of Egyptian hieroglyphs. Older sources are reliable if their content is critically reviewed and corroborated by modern scholarly peer-review sources. – Austronesier ( talk) 18:26, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, Chaipau, you have engaged with these people admirably and at great length. Page protection would be a good start. Further admin intervention may be required. Richard Keatinge ( talk) 20:04, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Simple English sentence - Upper bound for other groups and lower bound for Tibeto-Burman group isn't neutral point of view. 2402:3A80:DEC:75A8:5127:D6E4:1200:73B0 ( talk) 21:39, 5 June 2020 (UTC) If you ( @ Austronesier: , @ Richard Keatinge: ) are not biased and blind then can you ask Chaipau for this ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/960416740 ) type of disruptive edits. He removed sourced and historical fact. Yesterday, Chaipau also agreed that Boro were known as Mech ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/960538538 ). Why is he so much against Boro people ? All of his edits go against Boro people 2402:3A80:DD6:7520:4E45:E0F4:F188:F00C ( talk) 22:09, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
On a whim I went checking—it seems I started Boro people some sixteen years ago. It will be sixteen in about three weeks. That was my third edit on Wikipedia. This was the version then: [3]. My second edit on Wikipedia was to correct the definition of the Bodos—then it was defined as a rebel group and I think I corrected it to mean a people [4], who were struggling to maintain their language and identity. I probably created the Bodo (community) page after creating the red-link in the Bodo page, which later on moved to finally rest at "Boro people." Much water has flown down the Brahmaputra, it seems. Now we have a sock declaring "All his edits go against Boro people". My only regret is that even after sixteen years, Boro people is in a very sorry state. It has the look of a battlefield where terrible wars were fought, the grounds soaked in blood—what we wanted instead was a lush green field with nice trees, or maybe a few beautiful buildings. (Sorry for this bit of nostalgia---the curious thing was then, in 2004, we didn't know much about references and citations!) Chaipau ( talk) 01:04, 6 June 2020 (UTC) Huh, 16 years ago , You tried to increase your edit count but now you become a dominant and arrogant. You're also attacking the Identity. It's clearly visible from your edits. Now, same goes for your community , Read Struggling to be Tai-Ahom in India by Yasmin Saikia. 2402:3A80:DC4:2D56:589B:4E6D:5BA:987C ( talk) 05:06, 6 June 2020 (UTC) We're not struggling to maintain anything. Languageless cultureless communities like Chaipau's community are fighting against Boro to erase our History, Language and Culture. It's because they have taken everything from us. Mastermind like Chaipau are creator of all the conflict in Assam. 2409:4065:99:BFAA:BCFA:5B83:6DE6:76B4 ( talk) 05:20, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
If you can't be unbiased then don't waste your time. 42.108.36.85 ( talk) 12:42, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
Personal attack is not acceptable in any case. The editor is in two minds, e.g. he stresed above "Tibeto-Burman don't have to migrate anywhere.They are already in own land", also claimed "Boro means great man, Borofisa means Son of the great man. We were Chinese immigrants". भास्कर् Bhagawati संवाद 00:48, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
@ Drmies: The ew IP is most likely a sock of User:Sairg. – Austronesier ( talk) 15:48, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Many of the statements in the article are extremely disputed but going by the article, seem like objective facts. The entire section of People_of_Assam#Austroasiatic is a good example. TrangaBellam ( talk)
@
Chaipau and
Austronesier:
Taher, Guha and others of the 20th century shouldn't be used for the population history of the neolithic period. Their claims are based on guesswork or incorrect understanding of the past. Northeast heritage ( talk) 02:04, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
As assam is multiethnic state comprising of diverse indigenous culture and languages which were born and developed in the place that spread to entire northeast region post division of northeast era into different states, the priority of languages in the languages box should be given to the indigenous languages rather than languages which came later or not originating from assam or northeastern india.জয় আই অসম Metei91 ( talk) 16:16, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
@ Dev0745: please provide reliable sources for your edits here. The current sources do not support the new peoples you have identified. Also, please do not back-project current ethnic identities to the times of their relocation. The list is also not required to be exhaustive here, and the link is provided for the full article. Thanks. Chaipau ( talk) 08:47, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Adivasiya is a new name given by the Sabha for the creole. In their opinion, Sadri spoken in Jharkhand is the language of the Sadans or the Dikhus, literally meaning ‘outsider’. Sadri, spoken in Assam, is essentially different. The reason behind this is that, it is the product of heterogenous ethnic groups who came together to use it as a link language for socio-cultural reasons. Thus, Assam Sadri is essentially different from Nagpuria Sadri (Nagpuria) and other varieties spoken in different parts of the country." Chaipau ( talk) 09:42, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Kurukh(Dravidian) and Odia(Indo-Aryan) also spoken in Tea garden. But Provided reference only talk about adivasi, their language family i.e Dravidian and Austro-asiatic and don't mention their ethnic groups. So I am ok with it if u remove it. But they are mentioned in Tea garden community of Assam article. Dev0745 ( talk) 09:41, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Chaipau:, Why are you removing my edits. The two sources clearly mention it is Assam Sadri and Bagania. Is central government or state govt have recognised adivasia language? The Sabha don't own any language that is their not own. Scholar have not used Adivasia word for Assam Sadri. They have used Assam Sadri and Bagania. The name Adivasia is propaganda of tribal who are not the traditional speakers of the Sadri language. They should not be given priority as it is not their language. Scholar of languages should be given priority. Dev0745 ( talk) 16:07, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
As your wish. But put scholarly view. Dev0745 ( talk) 17:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks Dev0745 ( talk) 04:34, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
@ 2409:4088:9c09:183b::8288:6715 and @ 103.192.116.194 could you please explain why you had removed the text: [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]
These are properly cited relevant texts.
@ Tantomile, 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, and ComparingQuantities: - since you have restored the text on at least one instance. @ El C: - for admin visibility.
Chaipau ( talk) 22:11, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
@ El C: I am submitting this by way of resolution to the issue whether the DeLancey claim on creolization is WP:DUE on not:
Meanwhile, the bearers of Y-chromosomal haplogroup O2a2b1 (M134) in the eastern Himalayan region expanded eastward throughout Sìchuān and Yúnnán, north and northwest across the Tibetan plateau as well as further westward across the Himalayas and southward into the Indo-Burmese borderlands. On the Brahmaputra plain, the early Trans-Himalayans encountered the Austroasiatics, who had preceded them. The relative frequencies of the Ychromosomal haplogroup O1b1a1a (M95) in Trans-Himalayan speaking populations of the Indian subcontinent (Sahoo et al. 2006, Reddy et al. 2007, Gaziet al. 2013) suggest that a subset of the paternal ancestors of some Trans-Himalayan populations in northeastern India, e.g. certain Bodo-Koch communities, may originally have been Austroasiatic speakers with matriarchal, matrilinear or matrilocal societies, who were linguistically assimilated by Trans-Himalayans, providing a molecular genetic correlate for the ancient process of creolisation argued for by DeLancey (2014).
— George van Driem, Ethnolinguistic Prehistory (2021, p199)
Since the deleted DeLancey claims are mentioned by van Driem in this very context, the text is definitely WP:DUE.
The IP editor has not responded and Austronesier too has asked the text to be restored since the deletion was opposed by many editors, the text deserves to be restored.
@ Tantomile, 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, ComparingQuantities, and Northeast heritage:.
Chaipau ( talk) 20:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
"The Y haplogroup 02a is represented at a frequency of 77% in Austroasiatic groups in India and 47% in Tibeto-Burman groups of northeastern India. This patterning could suggest that Tibeto-Burman paternal lineages may have partially replaced indigenous Austroasiatic lineages in the northeast of the Indian Subcontinent and that Austroasiatic populations preceded the Tibeto-Burmans in this area, as linguists and ethnographers have speculated for over a century and a half."
DeLancey (2012) argues that Proto-Boro-Garo may have in fact developed as a lingua franca within the Brahmaputra valley; we find this thesis compelling, as it would explain both the modern-day distribution of Boro-Garo languages and their simplified morphological profile by comparison with their more conservative Northern Naga neighbours." (Post & Burling 2017:227)
When Tibeto-Burman-speaking people moved down into the Valley, they can never have been as numerous as the indigenous inhabitants, who had the food resources of the Valley to grow populous on. The Tibeto-Burmification of the Valley must have been more a matter of the language replacement than wholesale population replacement.
A serial decrease in expansion time from east to west: 5.7±0.3 Kya in Laos, 5.2±0.6 in Northeast India, and 4.3±0.2 in EastIndia, suggested a late Neolithic east to west spread of the lineage O2a1-M95 from Laos.
I think nobody who knows me even just a bit will be surprised when I say that I don't see any merit in joining discussions that have things like In 2007, Austroasiatics wasn't clearly understood. Only in 2011, Chaubey et al rectified Austroasiatic haplogroup.
C'mon, "Austroasiatic haplogroup"??? The correlation of genetics and linguistic affiliation is often tenuous, but the identification of Y-haplogroups with language families is utter BS. I'm otherwise on good terms with van Driem, but his father tongue hypothesis is complete rubbish. Just think of it: after only 10 generations, a person's Y-haplogroup tells us something about only one out of one thousand twenty-four of that's person's ancestors! Can anyone seriously believe that the other 1023 ancestors haven't taken a significant part in shaping the history of that individual? As for the rest, I'll have look at the relevant sources (NB the really relevant ones). –
Austronesier (
talk)
15:52, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
@ Northeast heritage: keeping in mind WP:NOTFORUM, I think we are best served if we work on specific changes to improve the article. Could you start a new section for that? We could keep this section to discuss the deleted paragraph. Chaipau ( talk) 19:23, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
As for the rest, I'll have look at the relevant sources (NB the really relevant ones), So I will wait. Northeast heritage ( talk) 13:58, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
This patterning could suggest that Tibeto-Burman paternal lineages may have partially replaced indigenous Austroasiatic lineages in the northeast of the Indian Subcontinent and that Austroasiatic populations preceded the Tibeto-Burmans in this area, as linguists and ethnographers have speculated for over a century and a half" where by "this patterning" he refers to the distribution of the "Austroasiatic" Y haplogroup in Austroasiatic and Tibeto-Burman speaking populations today.
On the Brahmaputra plain, the early Trans-Himalayans encountered the Austroasiatics, who had preceded them. The relative frequencies of the Ychromosomal haplogroup O1b1a1a (M95) in Trans-Himalayan speaking populations of the Indian subcontinent (Sahoo et al. 2006, Reddy et al. 2007, Gaziet al. 2013) suggest that a subset of the paternal ancestors of some Trans-Himalayan populations in northeastern India, e.g. certain Bodo-Koch communities, may originally have been Austroasiatic speakers with matriarchal, matrilinear or matrilocal societies, who were linguistically assimilated by Trans-Himalayans, providing a molecular genetic correlate for the ancient process of creolisation argued for by DeLancey (2014)"
Removed the text containing the revision by DeLancey (2012), as it's not suitable for the page as per WP:SDESC because it's all about Tibeto-Burman migration and not about Boro-Garo formation, so it's better to keep it concise. 103.44.172.186 ( talk) 16:16, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
It is expected that the Tibeto-Burman peoples were not as numerous as the indigenous Austroasiatic population, and the replacement was of languages and not peoples." So this deletion is definitely WP:DUE because it is about the migration and spread of the Tibeto-Burman speaking peoples, and not merely about the "Boro-Garo formation" as you suggest.
The relative frequencies of the Ychromosomal haplogroup O1b1a1a (M95) in Trans-Himalayan speaking populations of the Indian subcontinent (Sahoo et al. 2006, Reddy et al. 2007, Gaziet al. 2013) suggest that a subset of the paternal ancestors of some Trans-Himalayan populations in northeastern India, e.g. certain Bodo-Koch communities, may originally have been Austroasiatic speakers with matriarchal, matrilinear or matrilocal societies, who were linguistically assimilated by Trans-Himalayans, providing a molecular genetic correlate for the ancient process of creolisation argued for by DeLancey (2014)" Therefore, this claim is not just a claim by one linguist, it is further acknowledged by other linguists and also supported by the genetic data.
(rv. unreliable ref.)". I am at a loss to explain how van Dreim (2007) could be unreliable---you will have to explain this.