Intuitive fred888: Proto-Indo-European language?

The Proto-Indo-Europeans are a prehistoric ethnolinguistic group of Eurasia who spoke Proto-Indo-European (PIE), the reconstructed common ancestor of the Indo- ...

Culture

History of research

Urheimat hypotheses

Genetics

Images

Proto-Indo-European homeland - Wikipedia

Proto-Indo-European language | Britannica

Show more images

Things to know

Related Languages. Which language is closest to Proto-Indo-European?

Daughter Languages. What languages are descended from Proto-Indo-European?

Age. age of proto-indo-european language

Writing system. writing system of proto-indo-european language

Pronunciation. How to pronounce Proto Indo European

How valid is the theory of a Proto Indo-European language?

Reddit · r/linguistics

30+ comments · 3 years ago

It was a reconstructed language based on common words and cognates with a "consistent" vowel/consonant change in various European languages both old and modern.

34 answers · Top answer: One of the main factors in considering a genetic relation between Indo-European languages ...

Videos

11:41

All of Proto-Indo-European in less than 12 minutes

YouTube Zzineohp

Mar 20, 2024

10:24

Let's Talk About PIE (Proto-Indo-European) - Reconstructing ...

YouTube Draw Curiosity

Mar 14, 2019

12:15

Super challenging Proto-Indo-European concepts explained ...

YouTube Watch your Language

Feb 7, 2023

Feedback

View all

Proto-Indo-European language

Britannica

https://www.britannica.com › ... › Languages

referred to as “Indo-European,” “Proto-Indo-European,” the “common parent language,” or the “original language” (Ursprache) of the family.

Proto-Indo-European is claimed to be 5500 years old. ...

Reddit · r/AskHistorians

10+ comments · 9 years ago

Basically, Greek changed more in the 2000 year period from when PIE was spoken to Mycenae Greece than in the 3500 year period from Mycenae Greece to modern ...

17 answers · Top answer: It should be noted that many Indo-European languages took significant influence from 'substrate' ...

Proto-Indo-European Language Tree | Origin, Map & ...

Study.com

https://study.com › academy › lesson › proto-indo-euro...

All Indo-European languages descend from a language known as Proto-Indo-European (PIE), which was spoken in a region north of the Black Sea sometime between ...

Proto-Indo-European - (Intro to Linguistics)

Fiveable

https://library.fiveable.me › ... › Intro to Linguistics

Proto-Indo-European (PIE) is the hypothetical common ancestor of the Indo-European language family, believed to have been spoken around 4500 to 2500 BCE.

What people are saying

Why Proto Indo European seems to be more controversial in India than Iran?

Top comment · Well. Nationalism?

Latest comment · The comment I put earlier got massively down voted, so I'll try again with better phrasing and explanation. I talked to Indians online which gives a better idea of why they have their views. In Indian history the British colonized the country and divided it into a northern and southern part, in the view of Indians this was done to divide the nation. Indian languages being Indo-European is by some Indians seen as being in the same vein as the earlier colonization, possibly being used as an excuse for influence on India so they don't like the idea of Indo-European languages being part of India due to a traumatic past. Or they must be the one from which all other Indo-European languages originate, this is nationalism and some indians believe the OIT.

30+ comments · 5 days ago

r/asklinguistics

Proto-Indo-European washing caught me off guard... [Mallory, Adams, Oxford Introduction to Proto-Indo-European, p. 390]

10+ comments · 1 day ago

r/etymology

Do mainstream historians accept the idea that a PIE language existed?

Top comment · Yeah to be honest the entire comment is based on the idea that we know for sure that "proto-languages" existed, and from there it tries to find which languages can be traced back to PIE. The opposite happened: European travellers noticed some strange similarities between words in Latin/Greek and in Samskrit. That happened soon after the works of scholars such as Joseph Juste Scaliger in the 16th century who noticed links between extant and past European languages, though at the time it wasn't clear if these links were the result of geographic proximity or common ancestry. The first word that was used for comparison was "god", and thus the first four families identified were the Germanic oner (gott group), the Romance group (deus), the Greek group (theos) and the Slavic group (bog). Rapidly the hypothesis of common ancestry took precedence, expecially with the works of linguist Marcus van Boxhorn in the 17th century who identifies 7 groups: greek, latin, persian, germanic, slavic, celtic and baltic (which he named "scythic"). It's probably important to mention that grammarians from the Roman antiquity also wondered why so many words between Greek and Latin looked similar, so comparative works weren't new, but the idea of a common ancestry was. For the Roman grammarians, similarities came from geographical proximity or hellenization. Parallelly to the European comparative linguistics tradition, there was also an Indian one, represented for example by Siraj ud Din Ali Khan Arzu in the 18th century, who hypothesized a common origin for Persian and Samskrit. Following this, William Jones discovered that Latin, Greek and Samskrit had common origins, because of the common word roots and grammatical similarities that couldn't be coincidental. It's important to note that at this point, there wasn't yet an attempt at reconstructing what the original language was like. We have to wait for August Schleicher in the 19th century for that, with the Stammbaumtheorie, which is the foundation of linguistic reconstruction (and the concept of proto-language). It's sometimes compared to a sort of "linguistic triangulation". Then there are four major events that shaped IE studies, the first one being the deciphering of Old Persian in 1846, the second one is the discovery of Tokharian, the third one the deciphering of Hittite in 1917. Hittite belongs to the oldest branch of IE (the Anatolian family). The fourth one is the decyphering of Mycenian. These events made it possible to verify how we reconstructed PIE and phonetic changes through time. Note, there are still debates on the reconstruction of PIE, especially what we refer to as the "laryngals" (the sounds noted as H1, H2 and H3). Basically, it makes no doubt that all IE languages are related, however the proto-language itself is a hypothesis that is the result of linguistic reconstruction, which itself stems from linguistic comparison. It's a very strong hypothesis because we have often been able to predict and verify linguistic shifts in the IE family, and we have a set of established sound laws (such as Grimm's law that states that to certain IE sounds correspond certain Proto-Germanic sounds, for example IE dh -> Germanic n, as seen in médhu -> honey (compare with Samskrit madhu, Greek methu, Latin mel - genitive mellis). It is hypothetically possible to make predictions by starting with a PIE root and trying to predict what the descendant of this word should look like in a given language, but it's not really the usual methodology to verify that a language is IE, because obviously it's hard to pretend and to prove that we didn't know the word beforehand, and because there are also a lot of semantic shifts. Instead, predictions work by establishing sound laws for each branch, and verifying that there are no exceptions (but the ones that can be explained by later borrowings). Establishing that a language is IE is done through lexical and grammatical comparison, and by establishing and verifying the sound laws that govern sound shifts in the history of a given language or language family. As a last note, the idea that some words refer to ancient concepts (such as "fire" or in the case of IE, "charriot") is interested and lets us estimate when PIE probably existed (and where, especially if we use the words for various types of trees), however it is not necessary to establish the common ancestry of these languages and the fact that at some point, some sort of PIE language existed... Whether it was spoken by a homogeneous population or was some kind of lingua franca.

Latest comment · I mean, the time in which PIE is proposed to have existed predates any historical documentation from that region, so this isn't really part of the field of history There are no sources to investigate or interpretations to be drawn. All of the evidence for PIE is linguistics, so it makes sense that historians in general will have at best maybe a slightly-above-laypeople level of understanding.