Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 March 2024.
Individuals of our species, appeared in the African continent during the Middle Paleolithic, replacing the pre-existing Neanderthals in the Middle East and Europe. For about thirty years, two models have contrasted: the “single origin” or “out of Africa model” and the so-called “multiregional model of modern human origins”.
Since 2010, human paleogenetic research has highlighted the possibility of gene flow between human populations outside Africa and therefore episodes of interbreeding between Homo sapiens and pre-existing archaic populations in Eurasia.
Migratory flows underlying this phenomenon occurred through the progressive occupation of virgin territories following demographic growth in original cradle.
In a globalized world like the current one and subjected to a continuous flow of cultural exchanges, where national borders become increasingly relative, how much paleoanthropology, paleogenetic research and different models of reconstruction of our species' past, can impact the self-representation of mankind in 21st century?
In such research context, this topic could be focused by a series of papers with a multidisciplinary perspective highlighting the persistent relevance of our archaic past in the present world. First of all, papers could update the current models of explanation of the origins of modern man (including the most recent fossil discoveries). Moreover, paleogenetic studies concerning the position of Neanderthals and other archaic Sapiens are of great relevance, also in relation to medical knowledge in an era of increasingly frequent pandemics. We recall, for example, the recent investigations into genetic variants inherited from Neanderthals which would increase susceptibility to Covid-19 infection. In this sense, paleoanthropological and paleogenetic researches contribute in redefining on an ethno-anthropological level what is today the image of man "citizen of the world". For this reason, also papers with a philosophical, sociological and geopolitical point of view could give an original interpretation of scientific data by a cultural perspective.
The purpose of the article is to study the functioning of lexical units of Chinese origin in the speech of representatives of the Far Eastern emigration. The language of everyday communication is the first to respond to socio-cultural, ethnocultural, ethno-religious processes occurring in society. At present, when the culture of Far Eastern emigration in its close interaction with Chinese culture has become a fact of history, the reconstruction of the processes of intercultural communication between Russians and Chinese in Harbin causes great difficulties. This explains the relevance of studying the Chinese influence on the language of Russian emigrants who found refuge in Harbin in the first half of the 20th century. The novelty of the work is due to the lack of comprehensive studies dealing with Chinese borrowings in the everyday language of ordinary Harbin residents. An appeal to the memories and oral histories of Harbin residents allows us to trace how lexemes borrowed from the Chinese language and continuing to live in the linguistic consciousness of people who grew up in Harbin. The methodology of this article is based on historical-cultural, functional, linguocultural, and lexical-semantic approaches, as well as interviewing. The work uses materials from the authors’ field research among Harbin residents. Based on the results of the study, the authors conclude that although most Russians living in Harbin in the first half of the 20th century did not speak Chinese, Chinese borrowings were a constant part of their lives. This is especially true for various lacunae related to everyday realities, cooking, traditional culture, etc. Harbin residents organically assimilated such lexical units and preserved them in their speech for decades—even outside China. Of course, this testifies to close ethnocultural contacts between Russians and Chinese in Manchuria.