PDA

View Full Version : Difference of vocabulary between Western and Eastern IE languages



Maciamo
11-12-11, 21:26
As I have explained in Revising the classification of Indo-European languages (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?27103), I believe that there were two distinct groups of Indo-European speakers, one link to haplogroup R1b, which spread from Anatolia, the North Caucasus and the southern Yaman culture (grassy Pontic-Caspian Steppe), the other linked to R1a and originally expanding from the northern Forest-Steppe of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. The R1b branch became essentially West European and Centum, and the R1a branch chiefly Northeast European and Asian.

Although it seems that the R1a group adopted the language of the PIE R1b (given that the oldest branch of IE language is the Anatolian branch), I believe that a lot of native "R1a" words survived and were never found in the Western group, and vice versa. I also think that the different pronunciation of pre-IE language of the R1a people caused the satemization of the Eastern branch.

In this thread I would like to make a list of all the basic words found in Italic and Celtic languages which clearly differ from Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian languages. The Germanic words can fit in either. I prefer to exclude other branches which are not clearly R1a or R1b or have too much non-IE influence, including Albanian, Greek, Armenian and extinct languages such as Dacian and Thracian. Anatolian IE languages being older than the PIE expansion from the Pontic Steppes, I prefer to exclude them too.

Linguists please help !

EDIT

According to the Oxford Introduction to Proto-Indo-European by Mallory & Adams :

Cognates in Western IE only :

small => *pau
leaf => *behl
root => *wr(ha)d
sand => *samhdhos (Latin sabulum, Proto-Germanic *sanda)

Cognates in Eastern IE only :

stone => *hekmon
mountain => *g(w)orh

Yetos
11-12-11, 22:50
sorry but excude Greek Avestan and Sanshqrit might lead you to false conclusions,

Although I might agree that there is connection among the above Celtic Germanic and Baltoslavic
but same connections exist also among all IE

Taranis
12-12-11, 01:23
I'm not sure if that works out. Such patterns clearly exist, but my opinion is that they do not fit as neatly along the lines of Y-Haplogroup distributions as one would perhaps expect. I'm also not sure if discarding IE branches here from the picture will help, precisely because of the former.

Dagne
12-12-11, 19:43
According to the Oxford Introduction to Proto-Indo-European by Mallory & Adams :

Cognates in Western IE only :

small => *pau
leaf => *behl
root => *wr(ha)d
sand => *samhdhos (Latin sabulum, Proto-Germanic *sanda)

"smėlis" is sand in Lith. which is Eastern IE

Asturrulumbo
12-12-11, 21:58
I'm not sure if that works out. Such patterns clearly exist, but my opinion is that they do not fit as neatly along the lines of Y-Haplogroup distributions as one would perhaps expect. I'm also not sure if discarding IE branches here from the picture will help, precisely because of the former.
Indeed. There reason there are so many IE subgrouping models, and none very conclusive, is because of the difficulty in finding these lexical correspondences.

Taranis
12-12-11, 22:10
Indeed. There reason there are so many IE subgrouping models, and none very conclusive, is because of the difficulty in finding these lexical correspondences.

Exactly. I think the savest and most solid higher-order relationships inside the Indo-European languages are Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranic. And, although the case for an Italo-Celtic grouping is quite compelling, it is not as undisputed as the other two. For the any of the other higher-order relationships, I would say that there is a varying degree of supporters and opponents.

Asturrulumbo
12-12-11, 23:37
Exactly. I think the savest and most solid higher-order relationships inside the Indo-European languages are Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranic. And, although the case for an Italo-Celtic grouping is quite compelling, it is not as undisputed as the other two. For the any of the other higher-order relationships, I would say that there is a varying degree of supporters and opponents.
Apart from that, it's also safe to say that the Anatolian branch broke off from PIE earlier than any other branch (what would be the dominant haplogroup of the proto-Anatolians, R1b or R1a?).
I would also argue in favour of a deeper genetic relationship between Balto-Slavic and Germanic, but of course that is widely disputed.

Taranis
12-12-11, 23:53
Apart from that, it's also safe to say that the Anatolian branch broke off from PIE earlier than any other branch (what would be the dominant haplogroup of the proto-Anatolians, R1b or R1a?).

Yes, I absolutely agree on that. The Anatolian are definitely the first branch of Indo-European to branch off, due to the fact that they have a mix of archaisms (for example the partial preservation of the laryngeal sounds) and innovations found noswhere else (such as completely reworking of the gender system).


I would also argue in favour of a deeper genetic relationship between Balto-Slavic and Germanic, but of course that is widely disputed.

Well, my opinion is that the connection between Germanic and Balto-Slavic must predate the Centum-Satem split, because the shared vocabulary (compare the English word 'gold' with Latvian 'zelta' and Russian 'zoloto') was subject to Centumization/Satemization, respectively. My opinion is that Germanic must have subsequently come under the effect of Centum languages, which explains the "hybrid nature" that Germanic seems to have.

Yetos
12-12-11, 23:58
Apart from that, it's also safe to say that the Anatolian branch broke off from PIE earlier than any other branch (what would be the dominant haplogroup of the proto-Anatolians, R1b or R1a?).
I would also argue in favour of a deeper genetic relationship between Balto-Slavic and Germanic, but of course that is widely disputed.


and is more difficult if you consider that Hetit until 1950 considered non IE
and even today many arque causes lacks in basical IE grammar like genders etc

comparing toponyms we see the known Tracian brygian -ssa greek -issa but also the slavic -wa

ending of cities in -wata sends us that Hettit were not clear satem or satem , and that split maybe come later from Indo-iranian
lika Samossata
in Hettit may was Samowata
ending - wa exist also in M Europe example Warsawa Moshcowa etc
the one in Greek goes -via
Varsovia etc

I remember a post by Dagne and how yes no about connection of South Slavic with Celtic which indeed is amazing.


the case of 2 or 3 group is indeed something interesting ,

by I believe the criteria must be grammar
example the past form
is English (Germanic family) you put just a -ed to form the virb at end but in greek according how much past you put e- before or in more past the first letter +e-
example
βαινω
ε- βαινον
ε-βηκα (ν+σ = γ κ χ)
β+ε-βηκα

as you see that makes a clear difference of a linguistic group in IE family

since I am not specialist has anybody compare forms among Celtic Germanic and Baltic
or S Slavic like the above case?

cause no matter the same root or theme if forms are different then surely we talk about branch and not a clear split,
meaning that difference among Greek and Germanic in forms is big enough that you can not consider them as once one and split but much older split.
Or a grammar form according the conquered, meaning that considering Hettit had no gender we might get a conclusion that IE were Hettites spread them formed genders from IE Hettit root and their before Language,
meaning that IE were spread to Both Greeks and Germans but Forms stay as the older non IE language,
so in Germanic languages goes -ed at end cause the previous language used -ed - da etc to declare past
and in Greek the previous language used e- to declare past

(sometimes I think I give ideas for a PHD search)

Asturrulumbo
13-12-11, 00:01
Well, my opinion is that the connection between Germanic and Balto-Slavic must predate the Centum-Satem split, because the shared vocabulary (compare the English word 'gold' with Latvian 'zelta' and Russian 'zoloto') was subject to Centumization/Satemization, respectively. My opinion is that Germanic must have subsequently come under the effect of Centum languages, which explains the "hybrid nature" that Germanic seems to have.
Personally, I have the theory that this "hybrid nature" can be explained by the entrance of the Beaker culture from Central Europe to northern Europe, thus bringing Proto-Italo-Celtic vocabulary and perhaps the Centum sound shift (whatever the case, we can be sure laryngeals must have been hard to pronounce!) to the Proto-Germanic people.

and is more difficult if you consider that Hetit until 1950 considered non IE and even today many arque causes lacks in basical IE grammar like genders etc
True, though nowadays it, along with the rest of the Anatolian languages, is almost universally considered Indo-European (or at least, as a minority opinion holds, related to Indo-European).

Taranis
13-12-11, 00:20
Personally, I have the theory that this "hybrid nature" can be explained by the entrance of the Beaker culture from Central Europe to northern Europe, thus bringing Proto-Italo-Celtic vocabulary and perhaps the Centum sound shift (whatever the case, we can be sure laryngeals must have been hard to pronounce!) to the Proto-Germanic people.

Actually, this is not about the laryngeals. The laryngeals were probably already lost at that stage in both Centum and Satem languages. The Centum/Satem split is about a different set of sounds called the palatovelars (*k´, *g´, *g´h). However, you may be absolutely right about the reason for Centumization, namely that we may speculate that we are talking about people who adopted the Proto-Indo-European language (or, an early IE dialect close to it, see above), and that they were unable to properly pronounce the palatovelars (*k´, *g´, *g´h), pronouncing them just like plain velars (*k, *g, *gh) instead.

Asturrulumbo
13-12-11, 00:27
Actually, this is not about the laryngeals. The laryngeals were probably already lost at that stage in both Centum and Satem languages. The Centum/Satem split is about a different set of sounds called the palatovelars (*k´, *g´, *g´h). However, you may be absolutely right about the reason for Centumization, namely that we may speculate that we are talking about people who adopted the Proto-Indo-European language (or, an early IE dialect close to it, see above), and that they were unable to properly pronounce the palatovelars (*k´, *g´, *g´h), pronouncing them just like plain velars (*k, *g, *gh) instead.
You are right, I always confuse those two. And this could be added to the fact that, by c. 2300 BC, the difference between the dialects of IE must nut have been quite large.

Yetos
13-12-11, 00:35
well according others Anatolian languages are consider as the mother of IE
according others Afganistan
and according others Samara N East Caucasos

the ones who oppose that Hettit were IE also claim that Hettites learn IE at S west Caucasos

sory guys I had also put some more in my post


a good example of how the older language affect IE is in Spain

I am not talking about the s c goes ->th aspiration
but the sounds as pronounced and the rythm- music of a speaker
by hearing Basquez and non 15 century Spanish (above aspirations) in a third person might sound relative although they are not,
so who affected who Basquez IE or IE basquez?

the above as also forms can help realize of the previous language and transformations


so to continue my above post

Both Germanic and Greek are Centum,
But share different forms of past
so what had Happened?
from the Grammar we see no connection among them as split from a same group,
but they are both Centum same Group,
then?
1) both took the previous language forms but from a much older Centum IE,
2) both previous languages were Centum developed (laryngeals ) but one kept the correct IE forms
3) an unknown and unpredictable ( at least for me) story

Taranis
13-12-11, 00:39
You are right, I always confuse those two. And this could be added to the fact that, by c. 2300 BC, the difference between the dialects of IE must nut have been quite large.

I should add a word on the laryngeals though: in the older theories on PIE (which held themselves as late as the 1950s - for instance Pokorny's famous IE dictionary does not include them!), a different sound was reconstructed here, the so-called "schwa indogermanicum", "schwa" being the 'neutral' vowel sound (ə). However, it was realized that there were anomalies that could not be easily explained, and people began to postulate a set of consonants that had a "coloring" effect on surrounding vowels, which explained the anomalies. With the decipherment of Hittite, it was then realized that Hittite indeed partially preserves the laryngeals (in the shape of /h/), thus proving the laryngeal theory correct.