Talk:Harappan language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Languages (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of standardized, informative and easy-to-use resources about languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.


the consensus is clearly that the affiliation of this language is unknown. The "Dravidian hypothesis" is generally accepted as the "default" plausible hypothesis, without anyone claiming that there is actually positive evidence for it. Witzel's Para-Munda idea is a respectable alternative. The Indo-European and Semitic proposals are more marginal, but I suppose it is due to mention them as minority positions. The listing of these hypothesis can only take place under the clear statement that the mainstream position is simply that this isn't something that is known, or probably even knowable. Actually, Shendge's "Asura" stuff raises quite some red flags as WP:FRINGE. I suppose Shendge is an academic author, and so her idea should be mentioned, but I would certainly like to see some serious review of her book: I do not expect anyone to take this at all seriously, already because the etymology of asura is clearly *nsu-ro- and has nothing whatsoever to do with Assur. --dab (𒁳) 10:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I have also removed an image and link as off topic, since this article is ostensibly not about the Indus script. Avoid WP:CFORK. The script is to be discussed at its dedicated article, and is only of interest here in the context of hypotheses regarding the language. --dab (𒁳) 10:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

  • semitic?lol!"elamo-dravidian"?it´s a comunist teories..the anciet munda people, the proto-aryans and the isolated philum are most probabily..the southeast nostraticoid family eurasic-laurasian anciet.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:04, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Anon, your English is so bad it is hard to make out what you are saying, but you lost credibility when you stated that "Nostratic" has real traction among the vast majority of linguists. HammerFilmFan (talk) 23:05, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Meluhha a direct Dravidian word[edit]

"Meluhha" the name of or some part of Indus land as mentioned in Sumerian scripts, is more closer to the Dravidian/Tamil word "Melaham/ MELAGAM ", which means "the Highlands" or "the Westlands".

"Mleccha" sounds nowhere near "Meluhha". "-ccha" can never transform into or substituted by "-hha" in semantics and in vocalization.

If Mleccha is what was transliterated in the Sumerian script, then:

1. Why would Sumerians address the foreigners(from Indus) as "mleccha"-the word meaning "foreign" in Sanskrit/Munda, a foreign language? Why would they address them in a foreign language?

2. Or is Mleccha also a word in Sumerian lexicon?

3. Perhaps "Meluhha" is the name by which the Indus land was called. And denoting mleccha is not a possibility at all; (talk) 14:50, 18 February 2015 (UTC) 3.

let's be clear - no one knows![edit]

Until the 'code' gets cracked for this language, everything is just a wild guess. HammerFilmFan (talk) 21:56, 10 July 2012 (UTC)