Substratums in Indo-Aryan Languages

Nirvana

unread,

Feb 26, 2004, 8:26:21 AM2/26/04

to

Hello, which of the Indo-Aryan languages has the most
1. Dravidian substratum elements
2. Mundic substratum elements
3. Burushaski substratum elements

My guess are the following:
1. Sindhi or Orrion
2. Bengali or Nagaland's area
3. Kashmiri (if you can classify it as a Indo-Aryan language)

Jim Heckman

unread,

Feb 26, 2004, 8:26:20 PM2/26/04

to

On 26-Feb-2004, worryles...@yahoo.com (Nirvana)
wrote in message <34e36f1b.04022...@posting.google.com>:

Why would you not classify Kashmiri as an Indo-Aryan language?

--
Jim Heckman

Nirvana

unread,

Feb 27, 2004, 7:54:36 AM2/27/04

to

Jim,

Some scholars accept that Kashmiri is neither Iranian or Indic. It is
Indo-Iranian family of languages, but its subset is Dardic, along with
Nuristani.

Peter T. Daniels

unread,

Feb 27, 2004, 8:10:45 AM2/27/04

to

If you know that, why did you say "If it's even Indo-Aryan," or words to
that effect?
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net

pund kamath

unread,

Feb 27, 2004, 10:07:30 AM2/27/04

to

"Jim Heckman" <wnzrfe...@lnubb.pbz.invalid> wrote in message
..text snipped...

> > My guess are the following:
> > 1. Sindhi or Orrion
> > 2. Bengali or Nagaland's area
> > 3. Kashmiri (if you can classify it as a Indo-Aryan language)
>
> Why would you not classify Kashmiri as an Indo-Aryan language?

Some fellows have quite a goofy ideas having not read any decent books!

Larry Trask

unread,

Feb 27, 2004, 2:45:56 PM2/27/04

to

"Jim Heckman" <wnzrfe...@lnubb.pbz.invalid> wrote in message news:<103t75s...@corp.supernews.com>...

> Why would you not classify Kashmiri as an Indo-Aryan language?

The position of the Dardic languages, which include Kashmiri, is
debated, They are undoubtedly part of Indo-Iranian. But some
specialists see them as a highly divergent branch of Indo-Aryan, while
others see them as a third coordinate branch within Indo-Iranian,
along with Iranian and Indo-Aryan.

Larry Trask
lar...@sussex.ac.uk

Philip Deitiker

unread,

Feb 27, 2004, 4:08:21 PM2/27/04

to

In sci.archaeology, Larry Trask created a message ID
news:48c7f19.04022...@posting.google.com:

How about a creole language with pre-Indo-Iranian elements?
--
DNApaleoAnth at Att dot net

John Atkinson

unread,

Feb 28, 2004, 8:15:36 PM2/28/04

to

"Philip Deitiker" <Nopd...@att.net.Spam> wrote in message
news:Xns949C9A...@128.249.2.19...

With good reason, linguists today are reluctant to propose that a language
was once a creole without very good evidence. Postulating "mixing" of
languages and unknowable "substrata" to "explain" unexpected properties of
languages without well-documented histories has not proved a very productive
approach in the past, to say the least.

John.

Paavo P

unread,

Mar 5, 2004, 5:18:28 AM3/5/04

to

"Larry Trask" <lar...@sussex.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:48c7f19.04022...@posting.google.com...

BTW About I-I, what about uralic substratum in it!

Uno Hu

unread,

Mar 6, 2004, 5:07:44 PM3/6/04

to

"Paavo P" <etunimi.keski...@sserveri.fi> wrote in message news:<UtY1c.11003$g4.2...@news2.nokia.com>...

Do you have anything that would indicate a Uralic substratum?

Uno Hu

I H H

unread,

Mar 23, 2004, 9:38:06 AM3/23/04

to

"Uno Hu" <lora...@cs.com> wrote in message
news:9dff2144.04030...@posting.google.com...

Satemisation.
I thought it because some archeological evidence concerning mixed culture
where I-I could have been spoken.