I'm not a pan altaicist but in searching for Yangshao languages here is what I found. I didn't find anything wrong with the paper except for recognizing that it could just be another form of perspective that is equally valid as another that has been presented.
Here I just highlight areas of the article which have been discussed using different explanations:
culture could have come through the Gan-su corridor,
spreading from West Asia across the steppes and mountains of
Central Asia. The proto-Tibet-Chinese language that seems to
have dominated the Yang-shao complex eventually came to
dominate other branches of the linguistic family all over China
proper. The Mandarin dialect, in spite of its structural
Altaicization, retains the genetic connection with the proto-
It was said the Yangshao were homegrown. Archaeological evidence has shown the discovery of Yangshao type artifacts crafted in its later period but not early period, in Gansu, before it's total demise or transformation into something else. In other words the spread was towards the Gansu corridor and not away from it. Anyways you can see how it's not entirely conclusive and can lead to alternative explanations existing side by side.
The Shi-ji records that the Yan rulers were related by
blood to the Zhou kings. Barnes (1993: 135-6), however,
contends that the material culture of the local populace was
derived from the preceding Hongshan-Xiajiadian cultures, and
that Yan was so isolated from the center of Zhou politics that
it developed its own regional culture and political interests. The
Shi-ji records that a Yan by the name of [Wei] Man became the
king of Chosun sometime during 209-195 BC. The Ye section
of Dongyi-zhuan states that Wei-Man came “with a topknot
wearing barbarian clothes.” The Han section states that this
Yan person did wear Xiong-nu or Xianbei clothes, suggesting
the Mongolic Xianbei nature of the Yan.7
It can be argued that Yan was no more special than all the other states who leaders only sought to become masters in their own right to which their own people can steadily remain loyal to. This can be done by wrestling away a dominant culture such as Zhou culture and proclaiming rightful legitimate inheritance. Therefore similarities can themselves manifest falsely as detectors for heavily interdependent relationships while dissimilarities have the danger of creating the illusion that there were only minimal relations.
Yan was conquered by Qin in 222 BC. In 213 BC, Shihuang-
di was able to expel the Xiong-nu from the Ordos
steppe to their Transbaikalia hinterland, but the Qin army was
not able to cross the Yellow River. The Xiong-nu reoccupied it
after the fall of Qin. The powerful but short-lived Qin dynasty
(250-207 BC) was succeeded by the Han dynasties (206 BC-220
AD) with a fifteen-year interregnum of Wang Mang’s Xin
dynasty (8-23 AD). Many Han Chinese statesmen seem to have
believed that the war against the Xiong-nu caused the demise
of Qin dynasty.
Modern scholars have also explained the demise of the Qin based on the perceived weakness of its system in relying so much on bureaucracy to maintain systems which became worth much less or even detrimental after the unification of China. For example, draining the economy to build the Huang Di status (first emperor's mausoleum complex) was beheld by the rest of China as being an extravagant luxury for the state of Qin to do their rulers unnecessary honors especially in the dawning age of a newly unified empire.
Edited by mohistManiac, 21 August 2011 - 12:34 AM.