The Indo-European Origins of Sanskrit (Endnote to Nation)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 сен 2024
- Some details on the vowels of Sanskrit and how they demonstrate that it is descended from an early proto-language that is also the source of other Indo-European languages, adding to the information in our video on Nation: • How the Origin of "Nat...
Thank you to all our Patreon supporters! Please check out our Patreon: / theendlessknot
Endless Knot merchandise can be found in our store: www.redbubble....
Show notes & credits: www.alliterativ...
Website: www.alliterativ...
Twitter: / alliterative
Facebook: / alliterativeendlessknot
Tumbler: / alliterative-endlessknot
SoundCloud: / alliterative
Podcast: www.alliterativ... or itunes.apple.c...
Click here to sign up for our video email list, to be notified when new videos are posted: eepurl.com/6YuJv
Click here to sign up for our podcast email list, to be notified when new podcast episodes go up:
eepurl.com/btmBZT
Transcript:
Welcome to the Endnotes, where I put all the fun facts I can’t fit into the main videos! Today, some extra bits of information from my video about Nation - and if you haven’t seen that yet, click on the card.
In that video I briefly mentioned some of the linguistic arguments against an Out of India origin for the Proto-Indo-European language and language family. Here’s a little more detail on how the vowels found in Sanskrit and other Indo-European languages indicate that Sanskrit must have come from a common source with the other Indo-European languages and is not itself the source of the language family. Sanskrit has the primary vowels /a/, /i/, and /u/. These were originally assumed to be the original vowels in the proto-language, and /i/ and /u/ in Sanskrit correspond to those same vowels consistently in the cognate words in other languages. But /a/ in Sanskrit corresponds seemingly randomly with /a/, /e/, and /o/ in the cognates, and coming up with a regular sound change to explain this has proved difficult. However, if instead we assume that the proto-language had the original vowels /a/, /e/, and /o/ which were preserved as distinct in some of the IE sub-branches but changed as they developed into the Indic branch, that would solve the problem. With the comparative reconstruction of PIE, philologists further noticed evidence for a sound change of /e/ sometimes becoming /a/ or /o/. To explain this it was proposed that there must have been laryngeal sounds, that is, something like a /h/, present in proximity to those vowels, which came in three types, h1 which was neutral and didn’t change the /e/, h2 which was a-colouring and changed the /e/ to /a/, and h3 which was o-colouring and changed the /e/ to /o/, but in all cases these laryngeals had disappeared before any IE language then known was recorded, including Sanskrit-meaning that Sanskrit couldn’t be the “original” language. The real strength of the laryngeal theory is that when the Hittite language was later deciphered and shown to be an IE language, it was discovered to have preserved some of these laryngeal sounds, thus demonstrating that it must have branched off very early, preserving some of these and other archaisms. This clearly makes it relatively older than Sanskrit and the whole Indic branch of IE.
As always, you can hear even more etymology and history, as well as interviews with a wide range of fascinating people, on the Endless Knot Podcast, available on all the major podcast platforms as well as our other RUclips channel. Thanks for watching!
All the original sounds, name of gods etc are preserved exactly in the Vedic Sanskrit while they are modified in all the other IE languages.
This is a very informative video! Though well-reasoned arguments probably will never dislodge politically motivated conclusions, at least we can reassure ourselves with reasonable confidence that when we say that Sanskrit is not the IE "father language", we are using generally-accepted evidence and not defending 19th century Western chauvinism. That said... I wish nations would not bundle their... self-image... with creative academic theories. Granted, I say this while simultaneously a body of Americans still insist that chattel slavery was a friendly and nurturing enterprise...
You're wrong, because not only did Indo-European languages come from India, but humanity itself originated in India. The colonialist "scientists" who say that humanity came from Africa are misguided. (this is an actual claim which you may hear from time to time)
@@radishpineapple74 yeah same my thoughts!!!
@@radishpineapple74 India is Hindu kush was empty indians migrated there's from ellam zagros mountain from tajik groups
great video! special thanks for the very clean diction making it easier for non-native english speakers (even though im fluent its more relaxing when there isnt a strong accent)
Glad you enjoyed it!
I was aware PIE had several forms of h but not anything more. This was super informative :)
Assumptions
Sanskrit have different vowels for aa, a, o, i, u. They are not similarly pronounced.
I dislike the name "Indo-European" , i wish at some point we all start to use the original name "Aryan"
If that name hadn't been poisoned by decades of racist usage, maybe...
@@JustLooking I'm Persian and also Aryan, i had nothing to do with WWII, and because of one war we are changing an ancient name respected for thousands of years, whenever i type my race i worry that it might get censored, this censorship is racist
people are literally focusing on war and letting go thousands of years, it's sad that humankind today is so attracted to bad memories
do you also dislike the arabic script you write your channel name in
@@abbasmaheryar1111 This script is traced back to Avestan script, during Ashkanian Empire they updated it to Pahlavi Persian script and during Sasanian Empire they updated Pahlavi Persian language and then Arabs changed it to this new Script
No i don't hate it but i won't call it Arabic script
Also i don't know what made you question this
It is literally called "Arabic script" though, no matter how much you dislike it. Regarding calling the language family "Aryan", it's problematic for the reason that others mentioned, regarding its connection to Nazi Germany, but more importantly, "Aryan" was a term only used by the Indo-Aryan branch of Indo-European and as such, it'd be unjustified to call the whole family that.
Proto Indo European language theory has also been debunked. Out of India has been validated on many fronts other than linguistic model as well .
👎
Hi, Did British ethnocentrism make up the Proto-Indo-European Hypothesis because they needed a rationalization argument to validify their rape and pillaging of India? If the European male lines that replaced 90% of Men in Europe today had R1a and R1b, how do you explain the bottleneck of Y-haplogroups R, R1 and R1a in Northern India that has a higher variability of diverse lines that has existed in the subcontinent for 25 Thousand years? ✋ Thank you!
If that is True that means good bye the man of Indus valley.
Diversity in a haplogroup can occur in an area of that area has a larger population ( compared to the other areas the same haplogroup has spread to ). Diversity is non necessarily a good predictor of origin if the population sizes are not even.
This is discussed in detail in the 2019 landmark paper "The Formation of Human Populations in South and Central Asia"
@@Beyondarmonia Unfortunately, the evidence shows that the genetic makeup of the R Y-Haplogroups in India have been that way for at least 25 Thousand years. And the steppe hypothesis is much later. Please don't reference anything from Harvard or anything in mainstream academia everything has been co-opted. Thank you and please come again.
@@KeinsingtonCisco R? You're probably thinking of R1a. And it's actually the same thing I already talked about. You're refering to a preliminary study from 2009 that put forward that theory based of the large amount of diversity and microsatellite data ( which is not as good as current whole genome sequencing technology ).
The existence of R1a in India that far back has already been discarded since data from new whole gene sequencing shows while high in diversity, that diversity all comes from the same subclade R1a-Z93 which isn't older than 4 to 4.5 thousand years.
@@Beyondarmonia Sorry friend. R derived haplogroups originated in the Himalayas and even "low cast" tribal people have traces of R & R1a lines that are older than European steppe lines. Ancient India encompasses all peripheral areas adjacent and perpendicular to the Himalayan mountain range as it was stated in the Vedic literature. Just disregard all the Harvard propaganda you read prior to this and hold tight; new research is happening right now✋
Sanskrit is the source
@@servantofaeie1569 yes, yes it is
@@servantofaeie1569 Sanskrit is the source. It’s conclusive
@servantofaeie1569 you're stuck in incomplete information because of your prejudiced professors. Everything points to sanskrit being the source. Do your own proper digging and you'll come to know. Just for starters hint, here's some pointers:- dasaragna (the battle of ten kings) in rig veda, saraswati river, names of European rivers like Danube. Keep a neutral & positive mind, then you'll know
@@servantofaeie1569 assumptions. Anyway it’s not far when everything will be conclusively settled.
@@servantofaeie1569 all that you’re saying
Sanskrit is billions years old you won't understand
lol :D how about trillions
@@aizazkhan5439 you jealous and burning what's your history loot and conversion 🤣
Aaah 🤣🤣people Migrated from steppe grassland created sanskrit 😆Yesterday ......Sanskrit's history is fake
@@aizazkhan5439 said A mulla
Great, another deluded Indian nationalist.