Jump to content

Talk:Indo-Aryan languages

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bodhiupasaka (talk | contribs) at 11:40, 1 October 2023 (→Someone please update the classification chart: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Mitanni

It seems strange that Mitanni language would be Indo-European if its speakers are hurrian?

no, the Mitanni nobility were indo-aryan, ruling over a hurrian population. there was some confusion as to which language should be labeled "mitanni", but the term generally refers to the upper-class indo-aryan language now. see Indo-Aryan superstrate in Mitanni dab (ᛏ) 07:24, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

wrong numbers

@Kautilya3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_languages

  • The largest in terms of native speakers are Hindustani (Hindi-Urdu, about 329 million),[2] Bengali (about 200 million), Punjabi (about 100 million),[3] Marathi (about 70 million), Gujarati (about 50 million), Bhojpuri (about 40 million), Awadhi (about 38 million), Maithili (about 30 million), Odia (about 30 million), Sindhi (about 26 million), Braj Bhasha (about 21 million), Rajasthani (about 20 million), Saraiki (about 20 million), Chhattisgarhi (about 18 million), Nepali (about 16 million), Sinhala (about 15 miilion), Assamese (about 15 million), Haryanvi (about 13 million), Kannauji (about 9 million), Bagheli (about 8 million), Kashmiri (about 6 million), Dogri (about 4 million), and Bundeli (about 3 million), Garhwali (about 3 million), Kumaoni (about 2 million), with a total number of native speakers of more than 900 million.


  • i was understand in wikipedia 900 = 1086!


329+ 200+100+ 70+ 50+40 +38 +30+ 30+ 26+21+ 20+ 20+ 18 + 16 + 15+ 15 + 13 + 9+ 8 + 6 + 4+ 3+3+ 2 million=1086 million, with a total number of native speakers of more than 900 million.

What?!

Why there is no mention of just aryan alone? 2404:8000:1027:85F6:4C83:2256:B46E:F7D7 (talk) 15:07, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question of the day

Who coined the term "Indo-Aryan"? And when? Grierson already used the term in a matter-of-factish way at the end of the 19th century, and it is found earlier in works by William Wilson Hunter. @Dyḗwsuh₃nus, Chariotrider555, Uanfala, Joshua Jonathan, and Others: do you have a source about the ultimate provenance of the scholarly term? Austronesier (talk) 21:31, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to ping @AryamanA. –Austronesier (talk) 21:34, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting question @Austronesier, and not just of the day!
I'd like to dig deeper, but from what I know it appears that there's no clear answer to this. At least from the documentation available. It just appeared at some point in the 1800s.
And as is a must these days, one even consulted Giptipedia, with the same result! :-) Dyḗwsuh₃nus (talk) 09:54, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Kashmiri as well. Dyḗwsuh₃nus (talk) 10:04, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Dyḗwsuh₃nus, thanks for pinging, but I regret I won't be of much help here. Sanskrit grammar is the field I feel more comfortable in than the history of linguistics. — kashmīrī TALK 11:47, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Superfluous template?

I don't understand the necessity of the Anchor template call in ==== {{Anchor|Old Indo-Aryan}}Old Indo-Aryan ==== — wouldn't the anchor be there anyway, by virtue of the subtitle, even if the template call were removed? — Tonymec (talk) 14:10, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Someone please update the classification chart

The current chart/language tree implies that Vedic is the ancestor of the Prakrits , this has been refuted by later scholars such as Walter Petersen and Thomas Oberlies whose works are also cited in other Wiki Articles. I propose using a cropped version of the Indo European Language tree.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages#/media/File%3AIndo-European_language_tree_(with_major_international_languages_highlighted).svg Bodhiupasaka (talk) 07:37, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The IE tree is not really doing a better job, as it suggests that Vedic and Classical Sanskrit form a disjunct branch coordinate to later MIA branches, which is also over-simplistic. Ideally, we should have a diagram that directly reflects the prose: While Old Indo-Aryan is the earliest stage of the Indo-Aryan branch, from which all known languages of the later stages Middle and New Indo-Aryan are derived, some documented Middle Indo-Aryan variants cannot fully be derived from the documented form of Old Indo-Aryan (on which Vedic and Classical Sanskrit are based), but betray features that must go back to other undocumented variants/dialects of Old Indo-Aryan. –Austronesier (talk) 15:57, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
in other words , the current chart/tree used in this article is inaccurate/false ? Thanks for concurring, I'll remove the current tree then. There are citations in other articles that state that the Prakrits have even preserved features from Proto Indo Aryan languages that were lost even in Old Indo Aryan languages such as Vedic Sanskrit. Bodhiupasaka (talk) 09:22, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and I just remembered that User:AnonMoos has spend lots of energy in Talk:Prakrit to explain it to you over and over again since 2020. I have nothing to add to that. –Austronesier (talk) 16:03, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately whatever "explanation" the mentioned user has given is inaccurate as well. The anology that they state is false as well. Bodhiupasaka (talk) 09:24, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is NO source that says that Prakrits did not emanate from the same Old Indo-Aryan dialect continuum that included the attested forms of OIA, viz. Vedic Sanskrit and Classical Sanskrit. –Austronesier (talk) 09:36, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is with the all caps and the anger ? And could you explain why you reverted my edits despite you yourself implying that the Chart is inaccurate ? That chart implies that "all" Indo Aryan languages descend from Vedic Sanskrit.
"There is NO source that says that Prakrits did not emanate from the same Old Indo-Aryan dialect continuum that included the attested forms of OIA, viz. Vedic Sanskrit and Classical Sanskrit. "
I never said anything of the opposite. This is typical strawman argument. What I said was this.
"
Proto-Indo-Aryan is meant to be the predecessor of Old Indo-Aryan (1500–300 BCE), which is directly attested as Vedic and Classical Sanskrit, as well as by the Indo-Aryan superstrate in Mitanni. Indeed, Vedic Sanskrit is very close to Proto-Indo-Aryan.
Some of the Prakrits display a few minor features derived from Proto-Indo-Aryan that had already disappeared in Vedic Sanskrit."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Aryan_language Bodhiupasaka (talk) 11:40, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Indo-Aryan_languages&oldid=1178068086"