Live data from Hacker News

New insights into the origin of the Indo-European languages

mpg.de

151–157 of 157 posts

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

#151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Assuming PIE existed, you would be right. I am not saying it didn't.

While of course no PIE writings have been ever found, it's interesting that we have also not found references to PIE anywhere in writings in any other languages, from the times of the Sumerian Script all the way until William Jones showed up (or until slightly before his time). Please correct me if I am wrong.

William Jones was a sharp cookie to theorize PIE, no doubt. But for us to believe in the existence of PIE, we have to believe that there was no other cookie sharp enough elsewhere in the world, between 3400 BC (Sumerian Script) and 1786 AD (William Jones) who could have looked at Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, Sanskrit, and Persian, like Jones did, and derived a theory similar to PIE, and written about it.

One possible explanation could be that people who came before us considered this idea, and discarded it due to lack of sufficient merit, and we are simply reinventing that wheel.

On another note, all the old assertions regarding the death and follow on artificial revival of Sanskrit have been invalidated. Sanskrit, as a language, has stayed very much alive since ancient times. References:

- Hatcher, Brian A. (2016). "Sanskrit and the morning after". The Indian Economic & Social History Review. 44 (3): 333–361. doi:10.1177/001946460704400303. ISSN 0019-4646. S2CID 144219653

- Hanneder, J. (2009), "Modernes Sanskrit: eine vergessene Literatur", in Straube, Martin; Steiner, Roland; Soni, Jayandra; Hahn, Michael; Demoto, Mitsuyo (eds.), Pāsādikadānaṃ: Festschrift für Bhikkhu Pāsādika, Indica et Tibetica Verlag, pp. 205–228

- Seth, Sanjay (2007). Subject Lessons: The Western education of colonial India. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. pp. 172–176. ISBN 978-0-8223-4105-5.

Since I got downvoted and accused of "pointless contrarianism" elsewhere in this thread, I would like to say that I am not trying to offend anyone, nor waste anyone's time with my questions/thoughts/explanations. I am bringing up an issue that I think deserves discussion. I don't see what the problem is. If you don't like what I have to say, scroll past my comment. If you like what I have to say, I am happy to engage.

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

#152

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…

What is your proposed theory? It is understandable to be sceptical considering the scandal that was proto-altaic, however there is evidence in form of successful reconstructions of PIE languages.

This brings up the topic of standard of evidence that's considered acceptable in various fields. Successful reconstruction of PIE languages is similar to mathematical derivations in theoretical physics. In physics, successful derivation of mathematical results would not be considered "evidence". Evidence is mostly limited to observed phenomenon. Linguistics as a field seems to accept reconstructions as evidence. Which is cool. But it is interesting to consider the implications of using the standard of evidence of physics as applied to Linguistics, because it would certainly weaken (not eliminate) the case for PIE. It may create space for inquiry into non-PIE-assumed theoretical work.

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

#153

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.

So are you saying that they weren’t nomads when they migrated to India (or invaded it)?

> Bhagavad Gita is a short read, you can read and find there are no mentions of nomadic lifestyles in that.

Which was written between 5th century BCE to the 2nd century BCE? So at least 1000 years Indo-European migrations. How is that relevant?

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

#154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed this is so, but where does one find further information online (or not online) ? Such a case where language and genetics do not align is unusual in the world, but I have read that there are a few cases. Mostly associated with conquest and/or assimilation IIRC.

This is very common. The Romans did not genocide and repopulate everywhere they conquered, for example. A lot of romance language speakers genetically contiguous with Celts and other such things. And going back further there is evidence of genetic continuity with pre-Indo-European European populations too.

But given that Finland's neighboring languages (Swedish & Russian, the languages of the conquerors) are IE, wouldn't one (plausibly) expect to see an IE language atop a non-IE gene pool ? Instead one sees the opposite. So does this mean a strong link (of some sort or another) between Finnish and Saame (Lapp) ?

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

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

From reading David Anthony's book and others... The evidence seems to be that early proto-Indo-Iranian speakers traded and blended with the Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex (BMAC) in central Asia on their way to the subcontinent and the Persian Gulf. BMAC was a settled agrarian society with extensive trade networks and an unknown spoken language that probably lent a whole pile of words and concepts into the Indo-Aryan culture (multiple times in different eras, too, apparently).

A somewhat similar process likely happened in the settling of Europe the Yamnaya culture passed through, integrated with, displaced, or dominated the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture and other settled agriculture societies in the Danube & Balkans regions.

Likely by the time early Indic speakers came to dominate in the subcontinent they were at least in part a non-pastoral culture, maybe with the typical Indo-European tri-partite class system with warrior-priest-farmer, but all proto-Indo-Aryan speaking.

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

#156

For the layperson I highly recommend The History of English Podcast. Although the focus is on English is starts from square one with the Proto Indo European people -- what we know about their culture/technology, the various migrations and branches, how the language was reconstructed, etc. The host is always careful to point out how these conclusions were drawn and where there are competing hypotheses or uncertainty.…

Thanks for the great recommendation! I can already tell I'm going to go through the whole series.

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

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Assuming PIE existed, you would be right. I am not saying it didn't. While of course no PIE writings have been ever found, it's interesting that we have also not found references to PIE anywhere in writings in any other languages, from the times of the Sumerian Script all the way until William Jones showed up (or until slightly before his time). Please correct me if I am wrong. William Jones was a sharp cookie to the…

Maybe PIE speakers invented all of chemistry, general relativity, and quantum mechanics 8000 years ago, but owing to lack of any written language or higher-math educational institutions, their descendants have since forgotten it all. But it is not the way to bet.

You already admitted that an ancestor to the PIE-family languages existed. Are you objecting to linguists calling that ancestral language PIE? Maybe you have some other name to propose, and would like to persuade the entire population of modern linguists to switch to using your proposed name that you have not revealed to us yet?

You were downvoted for reasons you could learn from. Maybe read the posting guidelines?

Post reply on HN