Indo-European: Wikis

  

Note: Many of our articles have direct quotes from sources you can cite, within the Wikipedia article! This article doesn't yet, but we're working on it! See more info or our list of citable articles.

Encyclopedia

(Redirected to Indo-European languages article)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Indo-European
Geographic
distribution:
Before the 15th century, Europe, and South, Central and Southwest Asia; today worldwide.
Genetic
classification
:
One of the world's major language families
Subdivisions:
Anatolian (e.g., Hittite)
Balto-Slavic (e.g., Russian, Lithuanian)
Celtic (e.g., Irish, Welsh)
Germanic (e.g., English, German, Swedish)
Hellenic (e.g., Greek)
Indo-Iranian (e.g., Bengali, Hindi, Persian, Kurdish)
Italic (e.g., French, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish)
ISO 639-2 and 639-5: ine
IE countries.svg

     Countries with a majority of speakers of IE languages      Countries with an IE minority language with official status

The Indo-European languages are a family (or phylum) of several hundred related languages and dialects,[1] including most major languages of Europe, languages of Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, and historically also predominant in Anatolia and Central Asia. Attested since the Bronze Age, in the form of Mycenaean Greek and Anatolian languages, the Indo-European family is significant to the field of historical linguistics as possessing the longest recorded history after the Afroasiatic family.

The languages of the Indo-European group are spoken by approximately three billion native speakers, the largest number for recognised languages families. Of the top 20 contemporary languages in terms of native speakers according to SIL Ethnologue, 12 are Indo-European: Spanish, English, Hindi, Portuguese, Bengali, Russian, German, Marathi, French, Italian, Punjabi and Urdu, accounting for over 1.6 billion native speakers.[2]

Several disputed proposals merge Indo-European with other major language families.

Contents

History of Indo-European linguistics

Suggestions of similarities between Indian and European languages began to be made by European visitors to India in the 16th century. In 1583 Fr. Thomas Stephens, SJ, an English Jesuit missionary in Goa, noted similarities between Indian languages, specifically Konkani, and Greek and Latin. These observations were included in a letter to his brother which was not published until the twentieth century.[3]

The first account to mention Sanskrit came from Filippo Sassetti (born in Florence, Italy in 1540 AD), a Florentine merchant who traveled to the Indian subcontinent and was among the first Europeans to study the ancient Indian language Sanskrit. Writing in 1585, he noted some word similarities between Sanskrit and Italian (these included devaḥ/dio "God", sarpaḥ/serpe "serpent", sapta/sette "seven", aṣṭa/otto "eight", nava/nove "nine").[3] However, neither Stephens' nor Sassetti's observations led to further scholarly inquiry.[3]

In 1647 Dutch linguist and scholar Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn noted the similarity among Indo-European languages, and supposed that they derived from a primitive common language which he called "Scythian". He included in his hypothesis Dutch, Greek, Latin, Persian, and German, later adding Slavic, Celtic and Baltic languages. However, van Boxhorn's suggestions did not become widely known and did not stimulate further research.

Gaston Coeurdoux and others had made observations of the same type. Coeurdoux made a thorough comparison of Sanskrit, Latin and Greek conjugations in the late 1760s to suggest a relationship between them, about 20 years before William Jones.

The hypothesis reappeared in 1786 when Sir William Jones first lectured on the striking similarities between three of the oldest languages known in his time: Latin, Greek, and Sanskrit, to which he tentatively added Gothic, Celtic, and Old Persian. It was Thomas Young who first used the term Indo-European in 1813,[4] which became the standard scientific term (except in Germany[5]) through the work of Franz Bopp, whose systematic comparison of these and other old languages supported the theory. Bopp's Comparative Grammar, appearing between 1833 and 1852, counts as the starting point of Indo-European studies as an academic discipline.

Classification

Indo-European language family.

Indo-European topics

Indo-European languages (list)
Albanian · Armenian · Baltic
Celtic · Germanic · Greek
Indo-Iranian (Indo-Aryan, Iranian)
Italic · Slavic  

extinct: Anatolian · Paleo-Balkans (Dacian,
Phrygian, Thracian) · Tocharian

Indo-European peoples
Europe: Balts · Slavs · Albanians · Italics · Celts · Germanic peoples · Greeks · Paleo-Balkans (Illyrians · Thracians · Dacians) ·

Asia: Anatolians (Hittites, Luwians)  · Armenians  · Indo-Iranians (Iranians · Indo-Aryans)  · Tocharians  

Proto-Indo-Europeans
Language · Society · Religion
 
Urheimat hypotheses
Kurgan hypothesis
Anatolia · Armenia · India · PCT
 
Indo-European studies

The various subgroups of the Indo-European language family include ten major branches, given in the chronological order of their earliest surviving written attestations:

  1. Anatolian languages, earliest attested branch. Isolated terms in Old Assyrian sources from the 19th century BC, Hittite texts from about the 16th century BC; extinct by Late Antiquity.
  2. Hellenic languages, fragmentary records in Mycenaean Greek from the late 15th - early 14th century BC; Homeric traditions date to the 8th century BC. (See Proto-Greek language, History of the Greek language.)
  3. Indo-Iranian languages, born from a common ancestor, Proto-Indo-Iranian (dated to the late 3rd millenium BC)
  4. Italic languages, including Latin and its descendants (the Romance languages), attested from the 7th century BC.
  5. Celtic languages, descended from Proto-Celtic. Gaulish inscriptions date as early as the 6th century BC; Old Irish manuscript tradition from about the 8th century AD.
  6. Germanic languages (from Proto-Germanic), earliest testimonies in runic inscriptions from around the 2nd century AD, earliest coherent texts in Gothic, 4th century AD. Old English manuscript tradition from about the 8th century AD.
  7. Armenian language, alphabet writings known from the beginning of the 5th century AD.
  8. Tocharian languages, extant in two dialects, attested from roughly the 6th to the 9th century AD. Marginalized by the Old Turkic Uyghur Khaganate and probably extinct by the 10th century.
  9. Balto-Slavic languages, believed by most Indo-Europeanists[6] to form a phylogenetic unit, while a minority ascribes similarities to prolonged language contact.
  10. Albanian language, attested from the 14th century AD; Proto-Albanian likely emerged from "Paleo-Balkanic" predecessors.[7][8]

In addition to the classical ten branches listed above, several extinct and little-known languages have existed:

Grouping

Membership of these languages in the Indo-European language family is determined by genetic relationships, meaning that all members are presumed to be descendants of a common ancestor, Proto-Indo-European. Membership in the various branches, groups and subgroups or Indo-European is also genetic, but here the defining factors are shared innovations among various languages, suggesting a common ancestor that split off from other Indo-European groups. For example, what makes the Germanic languages a branch of Indo-European is that much of their structure and phonology can so be stated in rules that apply to all of them. Many of their common features are presumed to be innovations that took place in Proto-Germanic, the source of all the Germanic languages.

Tree versus wave model

To the evolutionary history of a language family, a genetic "tree model" is considered appropriate especially if communities do not remain in effective contact as their languages diverge. Exempted from this concept are shared innovations acquired by borrowing (or other means of convergence), that cannot be considered genetic. In this case the so-called "wave model" applies, featuring borrowings and no clear underlying genetic tree. It has been asserted, for example, that many of the more striking features shared by Italic languages (Latin, Oscan, Umbrian, etc.) might well be areal features. More certainly, very similar-looking alterations in the systems of long vowels in the West Germanic languages greatly postdate any possible notion of a proto-language innovation (and cannot readily be regarded as "areal", either, since English and continental West Germanic were not a linguistic area). In a similar vein, there are many similar innovations in Germanic and Balto-Slavic that are far more likely to be areal features than traceable to a common proto-language, such as the uniform development of a high vowel (*u in the case of Germanic, *i/u in the case of Baltic and Slavic) before the PIE syllabic resonants *ṛ,* ḷ, *ṃ, *ṇ, unique to these two groups among IE languages, which is in agreement with the wave model . The Balkan sprachbund even features areal convergence that comprise very different branches.

Using an extension to the Ringe-Warnow model of language evolution early IE was confirmed to have featured limited contact between distinct lineages, while only the Germanic subfamily exhibited a less treelike behaviour as it acquired some characteristics from neighbours early in its evolution rather than from its direct ancestors. The internal diversification of especially West Germanic is cited to have been radically non-treelike.[9]

The Indo-Iranian languages form the largest sub-branch of Indo-European in terms of the number of native speakers as well as in terms of the number of individual languages.

Proposed subgroupings

Specialists have postulated the existence of such subfamilies (subgroups) as Italo-Celtic, Graeco-Armenian, Graeco-Aryan, and Germanic with Balto-Slavic. The vogue for such subgroups waxes and wanes; Italo-Celtic for example used to be a standard subgroup of Indo-European, but it is now little honored, in part because much of the evidence on which it was based has turned out to have been misinterpreted[10].

Subgroupings of the Indo European languages are commonly held to reflect genetic relationships and linguistic change. The generic differentiation of Proto-Indo-European into dialects and languages happened hand in hand with language contact and the spread of innovations over different territories.

Rather than being entirely genetic, the grouping of satem languages is commonly inferred as an innovative change that occurred just once, and subsequently spread over a large cohesive territory or PIE continuum that affected all but the peripheral areas.[11] For instance, Kortlandt proposes this satemization process involved interaction between a western and central Indo-European sphere of influence to the ancestors of Balts and Slavs.[12]

Shared features of Phrygian and Greek [13] and of Thracian and Armenian [14] group the southeastern branches of Indo-European together. Some fundamental shared features, like the verbal aorist category (this is a verb form denoting action without reference to duration or completion) having the perfect active particle -s fixed to the stem, link this group closer to Anatolian languages[15] and Tocharian. Shared features with Balto-Slavic languages, on the other hand (especially present and preterit formations), might be due to later contacts.[16]

The Indo-Hittite hypothesis proposes the Indo European language family to consist of two main branches: one represented by the Anatolian languages and another branch encompassing all other Indo European languages. Features that separate Anatolian from all other branches of Indo-European (such as the gender or the verb system) have been interpreted alternately as archaic debris or as innovations due to prolonged isolation. Points proffered in favour of the Indo-Hittite hypothesis are the (non-universal) Indo-European agricultural terminology in Anatolia[17] and the preservation of laryngeals.[18] However, in general this hypothesis is considered to attribute too much weight to the Anatolian evidence. According to another view the Anatolian subgroup left the Indo-European parent language comparatively late, approximately at the same time as Indo-Iranian and later than the Greek or Armenian divisions. A third view, especially prevalent in the so-called French school of Indo-European studies, holds that extant similarities in non-satem languages in general - including Anatolian - might be due to their peripheral location in the Indo-European language area and early separation, rather than indicating a special ancestral relationship.[19] Holm (2008)[20] based on lexical calculations arrives at a picture roughly replicating the general scholarly opinion and refuting the Indo-Hittite hypothesis.

Satem and centum languages

The Satem and Centum languages is a much-debated characterization of Indo-European languages devised by von Bradke in the late 19th century based on a single main isogloss.

Suggested superfamilies

Some linguists propose that Indo-European languages form part of a hypothetical Nostratic language superfamily, and attempt to relate Indo-European to other language families, such as South Caucasian languages, Uralic languages, Dravidian languages, and Afroasiatic languages. This theory, like the similar Eurasiatic theory of Joseph Greenberg, and the Proto-Pontic postulation of John Colarusso, remains highly controversial, however, and is not accepted by most linguists in the field. Objections to such groupings are not based on any theoretical claim about the likely historical existence or non-existence of such super-families; it is entirely reasonable to suppose that they might have existed. The serious difficulty lies in identifying the details of actual relationships between language families; it is very hard to find concrete evidence that transcends chance resemblance. Since the noise-to-signal ratio in historical linguistics increases steadily over time, at great enough time-depths it becomes open to reasonable doubt that it can even be possible to distinguish between signal and noise.

Historical evolution

Proto-Indo-European

The Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) is the common ancestor of the Indo-European languages, spoken by the Proto-Indo-Europeans. The classical phase of Indo-European comparative linguistics leads from Franz Bopp's Comparative Grammar (1833) to August Schleicher's 1861 Compendium and up to Karl Brugmann's Grundriss published from the 1880s. Brugmann's junggrammatische reevaluation of the field and Ferdinand de Saussure's development of the laryngeal theory may be considered the beginning of "contemporary" Indo-European studies. The generation of Indo-Europeanists active in the last third of the 20th century (such as Calvert Watkins, Jochem Schindler and Helmut Rix) developed a better understanding of morphology and, in the wake of Kuryłowicz's 1956 Apophonie, understanding of the ablaut. From the 1960s, knowledge of Anatolian became certain enough to establish its relationship to PIE. Using the method of internal reconstruction an earlier stage, called Pre-Proto-Indo-European, has been proposed.

PIE was an inflected language, in which the grammatical relationships between words were signaled through inflectional morphemes (usually endings). The roots of PIE are basic morphemes carrying a lexical meaning. By addition of suffixes, they form stems, and by addition of desinences (usually endings), these form grammatically inflected words (nouns or verbs). The hypothetical Indo-European verb system is complex and, like the noun, exhibits a system of ablaut.

Diversification

The diversification of the parent language into the attested branches of daughter languages is historically unattested. The timeline of the evolution of the various daughter languages, on the other hand, is mostly undisputed, quite regardless of the question of Indo-European origins.

mid 2nd millennium BC distribution
mid 1st millennium BC distribution
post- Roman Empire and Migrations period distribution

Sound changes

As the Proto-Indo-European language broke up, its sound system diverged as well, changing according to various sound laws evidenced in the daughter languages. Notable cases of such sound laws include Grimm's law in Proto-Germanic, loss of prevocalic *p- in Proto-Celtic, loss of intervocalic *s- in Proto-Greek, Brugmann's law in Proto-Indo-Iranian, as well as satemization (discussed above). Grassmann's law and Bartholomae's law may or may not have operated at the common Indo-European stage.

Comparison of conjugations

The following table presents a comparison of conjugations of the thematic present indicative of the verbal root *bʰer- 'to carry' (whence English verb to bear) and its reflexes in various early attested IE languages and their modern descendants or relatives, showing that all languages had in the early stage an inflectional verb system.

Proto-Indo-European
(*bʰer- 'to carry')
I (1st. Sg.) *bʰéroh₂
You (2nd. Sg.) *bʰéresi
He/She/It (3rd. Sg.) *bʰéreti
We (1st. Du.) *bʰérowos
You (2nd. Du.) *bʰéreth₁es
They (3rd. Du.) *bʰéretes
We (1st. Pl.) *bʰéromos
You (2nd. Pl.) *bʰérete
They (3rd. Pl.) *bʰéronti
Language Family Indo-Aryan Greek Italic Germanic Celtic Slavic Armenian
Vedic Sanskrit Ancient Greek Latin Gothic Old Irish OCS Cl. Arm.
I (1st. Sg.) bhárāmi phérō ferō baíra /bɛra/ biru berǫ berem
You (2nd. Sg.) bhárasi phéreis fers baíris biri bereši beres
He/She/It (3rd. Sg.) bhárati phérei fert baíriþ berid beretъ berē
We (1st. Du.) bhárāvas --- --- baíros --- berevě ---
You (2nd. Du.) bhárathas phéreton --- baírats --- bereta ---
They (3rd. Du.) bháratas phéreton --- --- --- berete ---
We (1st. Pl.) bhárāmas phéromen ferimus baíram bermai beremъ berenk`
You (2nd. Pl.) bháratha phérete fertis baíriþ beirthe berete berēk`
They (3rd. Pl.) bháranti phérousi ferunt baírand berait berǫtъ beren
Language Family Hindi Modern Greek French German Irish Czech Persian
I (1st. Sg.) (maiṃ) bharūṃ férno (je) {con}fère (ich) {ge}bäre beirim beru bordam
You (2nd. Sg.) (tū) bhare férnis (tu) {con}fères (du) {ge}bärst beireann (tú) bereš bordi
He/She/It (3rd. Sg.) (vah) bhare férni (il) {con}fère (er) {ge}bärt beireann (sé/sí) bere bord
We (1st. Pl.) (ham) bhareṃ férnoume (nous) {con}ferons (wir) {ge}bären beirimid berem(e) bordim
You (2nd. Pl.) (tum) bharo férnete (vous) {con}ferez (ihr) {ge}bärt beireann (sibh) berete bordid
They (3rd. Pl.) (ve) bhareṃ férnoun (ils) {con}fèrent (sie) {ge}bären beireann (siad) berou bordand

While similarities are still visible between the modern descendants and relatives of these ancient languages, the differences have increased over time. Some IE languages have moved from synthetic verb systems to largely periphrastic systems. The pronouns of periphrastic forms are in brackets when they appear. Some of these verbs have undergone a change in meaning as well.

  • In Modern Irish beir usually only carries the meaning to bear in the sense of bearing a child, its common meanings are to catch, grab.
  • The Hindi verb bharnā, the continuation of the Sanskrit verb, can have a variety of meanings, but the most common is "to fill". The forms given in the table, although etymologically derived from the present indicative, now have the meaning of subjunctive. The present indicative is conjugated periphrastically, using a participle (etymologically the Sanskrit present participle bharant-) and an auxiliary: maiṃ bhartā hūṃ, tū bhartā hai, vah bhartā hai, ham bharte haiṃ, tum bharte ho, ve bharte haiṃ (masculine forms).
  • German is not directly descended from Gothic, but the Gothic forms are a close approximation of what the early West Germanic forms of c. 400 AD would have looked like. The cognate of Germanic beranan (English bear) survives in German only in the compound gebären, meaning "bear (a child)".
  • The Latin verb ferre is irregular, and not a good representative of a normal thematic verb. In French, the irregular Latin verb ferre "to carry" has been supplanted by other verbs and ferre only survives in compounds such as souffrir "to suffer" (from Latin sub- and ferre) and conferer "to confer" (from Latin "con-" and "ferre).
  • In Modern Greek, phero φέρω (modern transliteration fero) "to bear" is still used but only in specific contexts not in everyday language. The form that is (very) common today is pherno φέρνω (modern transliteration ferno) meaning "to bring". Additionally, the perfective form of pherno (used for the subjunctive voice and also for the future tense) is also phero.
  • In Modern Russian брать (brat) carries the meaning to take. Бремя (bremia) means burden, as something heavy to bear, and derivative беременность (beremennost) means pregnancy.

See also

Citations and notes

  1. ^ It is composed of 449 languages and dialects, according to the 2005 Ethnologue estimate, about half (219) belonging to the Indo-Aryan sub-branch.
  2. ^ 308 languages according to SIL; more than one billion speakers (see List of languages by number of native speakers). Historically, also in terms of geographical spread (stretching from the Caucasus to South Asia; c.f. Scythia)
  3. ^ a b c Auroux, Sylvain (2000). History of the Language Sciences. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter. p. 1156. ISBN 3110167352. http://books.google.com/books?id=yasNy365EywC&pg=PA1156&vq=stephens+sassetti&dq=3110167352&as_brr=3&sig=nOsHuf3fqPmzmjmGYk1UnvSiFAs. 
  4. ^ In London Quarterly Review X/2 1813.; cf. Szemerényi 1999:12, footnote 6
  5. ^ In German it is indogermanisch 'Indo-Germanic' which indicates the east-west extension. That term was first recorded in use in French original as indo-germanique, in 1810 by Conrad Malte-Brun, a French geographer of Danish descent.
  6. ^ such as Schleicher 1861, Szemerényi 1957, Collinge 1985, and Beekes 1995
  7. ^ Of the Albanian Language - William Martin Leake, London, 1814.
  8. ^ "The Thracian language". The Linguist List. http://linguistlist.org/forms/langs/LLDescription.cfm?code=txh. Retrieved 2008-01-27. "An ancient language of Southern Balkans, belonging to the Satem group of Indo-European. This language is the most likely ancestor of modern Albanian (which is also a Satem language), though the evidence is scanty. 1st Millennium BC - 500 AD." 
  9. ^ [1] Perfect Phylogenetic Networks: A New Methodology for Reconstructing the Evolutionary History of Natural Languages - Luay Nakhleh,Don Ringe & Tandy Warnow, 2005, Language- Journal of the Linguistic Society of America, Volume 81, Number 2, June 2005
  10. ^ Mallory J.P., D. Q. Adams (Hrsg.): Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture, Fitzroy Dearborn, London, 1997
  11. ^ Britannica 15th edition, vol.22, 1981, p.588, 594
  12. ^ Frederik Kortlandt-The spread of the Indo-Europeans, 1989
  13. ^ Lubotsky - The Old Phrygian Areyastis-inscription, Kadmos 27, 9-26, 1988
  14. ^ Kortlandt - The Thraco-Armenian consonant shift, Linguistique Balkanique 31, 71-74, 1988
  15. ^ Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol.22, Helen Hemingway Benton Publisher, Chicago, (15th ed.) 1981, p.593
  16. ^ George S. Lane, Douglas Q. Adams, Britannica 15th edition 22:667, "The Tocharian problem"
  17. ^ The supposed autochthony of Hittites, the Indo-Hittite hypothesis and migration of agricultural "Indo-European" societies became intrinsically linked together by C. Renfrew. (Renfrew, C 2001a The Anatolian origins of Proto-Indo-European and the autochthony of the Hittites. In R. Drews ed., Greater Anatolia and the Indo-Hittite language. family: 36-63. Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Man).
  18. ^ Britannica 15th edition, 22 p. 586 "Indo-European languages, The parent language, Laryngeal theory" - W.C.; p. 589, 593 "Anatolian languages" - Philo H.J. Houwink ten Cate, H. Craig Melchert and Theo P.J. van den Hout
  19. ^ Britannica 15th edition, 22 p. 594, "Indo-Hittite hypothesis"
  20. ^ [2] Holm, Hans J.: The Distribution of Data in Word Lists and its Impact on the Subgrouping of Languages. In: Christine Preisach, Hans Burkhardt, Lars Schmidt-Thieme, Reinhold Decker (eds.): Data Analysis, Machine Learning, and Applications. Proc. of the 31st Annual Conference of the German Classification Society (GfKl), University of Freiburg, March 7-9, 2007. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg-Berlin (2008)
  21. ^ http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/iedocctr/ie-lg/Balto-Slavic.html

References

  • Auroux, Sylvain, History of the Language Sciences, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 2000 ISBN 3110167352.
  • Kortlandt, Frederik, 1990, The Spread of the Indo-Europeans, Journal of Indo-European Studies, 18.1-2: 131-140
  • Lubotsky, A., The Old Phrygian Areyastis-inscription, Kadmos 27, 9-26, 1988
  • Kortlandt, Frederik , The Thraco-Armenian consonant shift, Linguistique Balkanique 31, 71-74, 1988
  • Lane, George S., Adams, Douglas Q., The Tocharian problem, Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol.22, Helen Hemingway Benton Publisher, Chicago, (15th ed.) 1981
  • Renfrew, C., The Anatolian origins of Proto-Indo-European and the autochthony of the Hittites. In R. Drews ed., Greater Anatolia and the Indo-Hittite language family, Institute for the Study of Man, Washington, DC, 2001
  • Houwink ten Cate, H.J., Melchert, H. Craig and van den Hout, Theo P.J. Indo-European languages, The parent language, Laryngeal theory, Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol.22, Helen Hemingway Benton Publisher, Chicago, (15th ed.) 1981
  • Holm, Hans J., The Distribution of Data in Word Lists and its Impact on the Subgrouping of Languages, in Christine Preisach, Hans Burkhardt, Lars Schmidt-Thieme, Reinhold Decker (eds.), Data Analysis, Machine Learning, and Applications, Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the German Classification Society (GfKl), University of Freiburg, March 7-9, 2007, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg-Berlin, 2008
  • Szemerényi, Oswald; David Jones, Irene Jones (1999). Introduction to Indo-European Linguistics. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780198238706. 

Further reading

  • Beekes, Robert S. P. (1995). Comparative Indo-European Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 
  • Chakrabarti, Byomkes (1994). A comparative study of Santali and Bengali. Calcutta: K.P. Bagchi & Co.. ISBN 8170741289. 
  • Collinge, N. E. (1985). The Laws of Indo-European. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 
  • Mallory, J.P. (1989). In Search of the Indo-Europeans. London: Thames and Hudson. ISBN 0-500-27616-1. 
  • Renfrew, Colin (1987). Archaeology & Language. The Puzzle of the Indo-European Origins. London: Jonathan Cape. ISBN 0-224-02495-7. 
  • Meillet, Antoine. Esquisse d’une grammaire comparée de l’arménien classique,1903.
  • Schleicher, August, A Compendium of the Comparative Grammar of the Indo-European Languages (1861/62).
  • Strazny, Philip (Ed). (2000). Dictionary of Historical and Comparative Linguistics (1 ed.). Routledge. ISBN 978-1579582180. 
  • Szemerényi, Oswald (1957). "The problem of Balto-Slav unity". Kratylos 2: 97–123. 
  • Watkins, Calvert (2000). The American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European Roots. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0-618-08250-6. 
  • Remys, Edmund, General distinguishing features of various Indo-European languages and their relationship to Lithuanian. Berlin, New York: Indogermanische Forschungen, Vol. 112, 2007.
  • Babaev, Kirill (2008). Origins of Indo-European Person Markers. Eidos. ISBN 978-5-902948-30-8. 

External links

Databases

Lexica


Wiktionary

Up to date as of January 15, 2010

Definition from Wiktionary, a free dictionary

Wikipedia-logo.png
Wikipedia has an article on:

Wikipedia

Contents

English

Etymology

Coined in 1813 by Sir Thomas Young.

Proper noun

Singular
Indo-European

Plural
-

Indo-European

  1. A major language family which includes many of the languages between Europe and India, with notable Indic, Iranian and European sub-branches.
  2. Proto-Indo-European: the hypothetical parent language of the Indo-European language family.

Related terms

See also

External links

Noun

Singular
Indo-European

Plural
Indo-Europeans

Indo-European (plural Indo-Europeans)

  1. A member of the original ethnolinguistic group hypothesized to have spoken Proto-Indo-European and thus to have been the ancestor for most of Western Eurasia.

Translations

The translations below need to be checked and inserted above into the appropriate translation tables, removing any numbers. Numbers do not necessarily match those in definitions. See instructions at Help:How to check translations.

Adjective

Indo-European (comparative more Indo-European, superlative most Indo-European)

Positive
Indo-European

Comparative
more Indo-European

Superlative
most Indo-European

  1. Of or related to the languages originally spoken in Europe and Western Asia.
  2. Of or related to the hypothetical parent language of the Indo-European language family. Also called Proto-Indo-European and abbreviated PIE.
  3. Of or related to the hypothetical group of peoples that spread Indo-European tongues.

Translations

External links


Simple English

For the languages, see Indo-European languages.

Indo-European refers to culture and language from western- India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Europe. Languages from these places share a common heritage. For example, Sanskrit was an early Indo-European language.








Got something to say? Make a comment.
Your name
Your email address
Message