Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

mpg.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 157 posts

Re: New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

#141

Post by angiosperm »

funnybusiness2 wrote: post #129

Playing devil's advocate here: Given that there is not a shred of evidence that we have found so far that supports the idea of the existence of the Proto-Indo-European language, why are so many linguists (and researchers from other disciplines) continuing to invest in research with a firm belief/assumption that PIE ever existed? Is it because it would be a career ending move for a linguist to conduct research that as…

The existence of indo-european languages is itself ironclad evidence of the existence of a proto-indo-european language. The alternative would be that each of the populations speaking an indo-european language just made up identical vocabulary independently.

Details of PIE are subject to revision based on new evidence. Its existence is not in question.

Re: New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

#142

Post by funnybusiness2 »

angiosperm wrote: post #141
funnybusiness2 wrote: post #129

Playing devil's advocate here: Given that there is not a shred of evidence that we have found so far that supports the idea of the existence of the Proto-Indo-European language, why are so many linguists (and researchers from other disciplines) continuing to invest in research with a firm belief/assumption that PIE ever existed? Is it because it would be a career ending move for a linguist to conduct research that as…

The existence of indo-european languages is itself ironclad evidence of the existence of a proto-indo-european language. The alternative would be that each of the populations speaking an indo-european language just made up identical vocabulary independently. Details of PIE are subject to revision based on new evidence. Its existence is not in question.

I think what you are saying is that the existence of indo-european languages could only reasonably be explained by them having originated from a common ancestral language. I agree with you.

The open question is whether this common ancestral language is the imagined / reconstructed extinct language called Proto-Indo-European that does not currently have any supporting physical evidence (cave paintings, stone carvings, Papyrus manuscripts, tablets, and whatnot) proving its existence, or is it one of the many surviving languages still spoken today?

I don't think we know the answer to that question.

Re: New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

#143

Post by jeltz »

funnybusiness2 wrote: post #132
funnybusiness2 wrote: post #129

Playing devil's advocate here: Given that there is not a shred of evidence that we have found so far that supports the idea of the existence of the Proto-Indo-European language, why are so many linguists (and researchers from other disciplines) continuing to invest in research with a firm belief/assumption that PIE ever existed? Is it because it would be a career ending move for a linguist to conduct research that as…

My question got downvoted. I wonder whose feathers I ruffled.

People who do not like pointless contrarianism like your comment.

Re: New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

#144

Post by cscurmudgeon »

ffhhttt wrote: post #131
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Bhagavad Gita is quite clear about the cultures of the old Aryan peoples. They were nomadic, cowherding peoples, who were highly patriarchal, that valued prowess in battle and the ability to kill your enemies ruthlessly, even if they were members of your own family. Not this again. This is an old missionaries tale. There are descriptions of large cities and palaces in Mahabharata (of which Gita is part). Nomads…

I’m not sure how do these things contradict each other? Nomadic civilizations can definitely transition to almost fully sedentary ones and ‘start building palaces’ while preserving some of their cultural history and social norms.

The comment I replied to implies no such transition happened. Also the Bhagavad Gita is a short read, you can read and find there are no mentions of nomadic lifestyles in that.

Re: New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

#145

Post by wolverine876 »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #93
whimsicalism wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure - and of course let me preface this by saying I am not an archaeologist, merely someone who is interested. My comment was perhaps overgeneralizing specifically from the early neolithic transition in Europe more broadly than I should have been. One example of the work I am discussing is the work of Cavalli-Sforza (ie https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.94.15.7719 ). My understanding of the history of academic w…

Yeah, the situation with the European neolithic transition is one where there's a substantial amount of population discontinuity and people are partial to replacement specifically, though there's still some debate as to the exact nature and timeline of that replacement. For example, I've excavated areas with centuries of coexistence between foragers and early sedentary farmers during the neolithic transition, which m…

Thank you for sharing your expertise!

Re: New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

#146

Post by whatsup7123 »

funnybusiness2 wrote: post #129

Playing devil's advocate here: Given that there is not a shred of evidence that we have found so far that supports the idea of the existence of the Proto-Indo-European language, why are so many linguists (and researchers from other disciplines) continuing to invest in research with a firm belief/assumption that PIE ever existed? Is it because it would be a career ending move for a linguist to conduct research that as…

This is interesting. If PIE did not actually exist, what language would be the root instead? Because chronologically, there does need to be some root language that explains the patterns.

Re: New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

#147

Post by angiosperm »

funnybusiness2 wrote: post #142
angiosperm wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The existence of indo-european languages is itself ironclad evidence of the existence of a proto-indo-european language. The alternative would be that each of the populations speaking an indo-european language just made up identical vocabulary independently. Details of PIE are subject to revision based on new evidence. Its existence is not in question.

I think what you are saying is that the existence of indo-european languages could only reasonably be explained by them having originated from a common ancestral language. I agree with you. The open question is whether this common ancestral language is the imagined / reconstructed extinct language called Proto-Indo-European that does not currently have any supporting physical evidence (cave paintings, stone carvings,…

PIE is, exactly, the name of that ancestral language. We are able to deduce many details of that language from a large amount of distributed evidence about extant languages and extinct written languages. A great many details have been elucidated from this evidence, more all the time. Sometimes new evidence leads to changes to the deduced model.

It is hard to understand what you think is the difference between the ancestral language and PIE. PIE was almost certainly not a written language, so carvings or manuscripts can exist only in fantasies. We have enormous evidence of the existence of non-written languages.

Re: New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

#148

Post by cmrdporcupine »

fsckboy wrote: post #139
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's irrelevant, as I point out below. Armenian is not an Anatolian language despite it existing in the Anatolian region. The Anatolian languages are all extinct, and Armenian has its origins out of the Yamnaya migration out of the steppe just like the rest of living Indo-European languages. Armenian is Armenian, not related to Hittite, Luwian, etc. of the Bronze age in any way except as extremely distant cousins.

are you saying that the arrows on the map of TFA do not indicate, or are not correct, that Greek and Albanian did not come from the steppe?

My bad, I didn't clue into that visually. That makes me really skeptical of this paper. I just can't see the likelihood that Greek and Armenian are that disjoint from the rest of the family that they could possibly have an origin in Anatolia and not in the same region as the rest of the languages.

Re: New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

#149

Post by DiscourseFan »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #144
ffhhttt wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure how do these things contradict each other? Nomadic civilizations can definitely transition to almost fully sedentary ones and ‘start building palaces’ while preserving some of their cultural history and social norms.

The comment I replied to implies no such transition happened. Also the Bhagavad Gita is a short read, you can read and find there are no mentions of nomadic lifestyles in that.

I did not say that they never transitioned to a pastoral lifestyle, I said that the original peoples clearly migrated as a nomadic tribe, which is substantiated by a lot of evidence. Unless you believe in the Out of India Theory which is peddled by members of the far-right in order to justify their political supremacy.

Re: New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

#150

Post by angiosperm »

funnybusiness2 wrote: post #142
angiosperm wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The existence of indo-european languages is itself ironclad evidence of the existence of a proto-indo-european language. The alternative would be that each of the populations speaking an indo-european language just made up identical vocabulary independently. Details of PIE are subject to revision based on new evidence. Its existence is not in question.

I think what you are saying is that the existence of indo-european languages could only reasonably be explained by them having originated from a common ancestral language. I agree with you. The open question is whether this common ancestral language is the imagined / reconstructed extinct language called Proto-Indo-European that does not currently have any supporting physical evidence (cave paintings, stone carvings,…

It should be obvious that a non-written language from 8000 years ago would not be spoken today, just as much newer languages Latin and Sanskrit are long dead, as was Hebrew until artificially revived. Spoken Hebrew is evolving fast.
Post reply on HN