Armenian hypothesis: Difference between revisions
Testerarms (talk | contribs) m spelling error, fixing link |
Testerarms (talk | contribs) adding other source which was removed |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{pp-semi-protected|small=yes}} |
{{pp-semi-protected|small=yes}} |
||
{{Indo-European}} |
{{Indo-European}} |
||
The '''Armenian hypothesis''' of the [[Proto-Indo-European language|Proto-Indo-European]] ''[[Urheimat]]'', based on the [[Glottalic theory]] suggests that the [[Proto-Indo-European language]] was spoken during the [[3rd millennium BC]] in the [[Armenian Highland]]. It is an [[Indo-Hittite]] model and does not include the [[Anatolian languages]] in its scenario. PIE ("[[Graeco-Aryan|Graeco-Armeno-Aryan]]") would date to after 3000 BC and constitute a language group contemporary to, and in [[language contact]] with, the Anatolian language family adjacent to the west.<ref>Renfrew, Archaeology and Language, 159-60 |
The '''Armenian hypothesis''' of the [[Proto-Indo-European language|Proto-Indo-European]] ''[[Urheimat]]'', based on the [[Glottalic theory]] suggests that the [[Proto-Indo-European language]] was spoken during the [[3rd millennium BC]] in the [[Armenian Highland]]. It is an [[Indo-Hittite]] model and does not include the [[Anatolian languages]] in its scenario. PIE ("[[Graeco-Aryan|Graeco-Armeno-Aryan]]") would date to after 3000 BC and constitute a language group contemporary to, and in [[language contact]] with, the Anatolian language family adjacent to the west.Johannes Schmidt, Die Urheimat der Indogermanen und das europaïsche Zahlensystem, Weimar, 1890</ref><ref>[[Colin Renfrew]], Archaeology and Language, 159-60</ref><ref>[[Tamaz Gamkrelidze|T. V. Gamkrelidze]] and [[Vyacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov|V. V. Ivanov]], ''The Early History of Indo-European Languages'', Scientific American, March 1990 |
||
</ref> The phonological peculiarities proposed in the Glottalic theory would be best preserved in the [[Armenian language]] and the [[Germanic languages]], the former assuming the role of the dialect which remained ''in situ'', implied to be particularly archaic in spite of its late attestation. [[Proto-Greek]] would be practically equivalent to [[Mycenean Greek]] and date to the 17th century BC, closely associating Greek migration to Greece with the [[Indo-Aryan migration]] to India at about the same time (viz., Indo-European expansion at the transition to the [[Late Bronze Age]], including the possibility of Indo-European [[Kassites]]). |
|||
The Armenian hypothesis argues for the latest possible date of Proto-Indo-European (''sans'' Anatolian), a full millennium later than the mainstream [[Kurgan hypothesis]]. In this, it figures as an opposite to the [[Anatolian hypothesis]], in spite of the geographical proximity of the respective ''Urheimaten'' suggested, diverging from the timeframe suggested there by full three millennia. |
The Armenian hypothesis argues for the latest possible date of Proto-Indo-European (''sans'' Anatolian), a full millennium later than the mainstream [[Kurgan hypothesis]]. In this, it figures as an opposite to the [[Anatolian hypothesis]], in spite of the geographical proximity of the respective ''Urheimaten'' suggested, diverging from the timeframe suggested there by full three millennia. |
||
Revision as of 17:41, 12 April 2008
| Part of a series on |
| Indo-European topics |
|---|
 |
The Armenian hypothesis of the Proto-Indo-European Urheimat, based on the Glottalic theory suggests that the Proto-Indo-European language was spoken during the 3rd millennium BC in the Armenian Highland. It is an Indo-Hittite model and does not include the Anatolian languages in its scenario. PIE ("Graeco-Armeno-Aryan") would date to after 3000 BC and constitute a language group contemporary to, and in language contact with, the Anatolian language family adjacent to the west.Johannes Schmidt, Die Urheimat der Indogermanen und das europaïsche Zahlensystem, Weimar, 1890</ref>[1][2] The phonological peculiarities proposed in the Glottalic theory would be best preserved in the Armenian language and the Germanic languages, the former assuming the role of the dialect which remained in situ, implied to be particularly archaic in spite of its late attestation. Proto-Greek would be practically equivalent to Mycenean Greek and date to the 17th century BC, closely associating Greek migration to Greece with the Indo-Aryan migration to India at about the same time (viz., Indo-European expansion at the transition to the Late Bronze Age, including the possibility of Indo-European Kassites).
The Armenian hypothesis argues for the latest possible date of Proto-Indo-European (sans Anatolian), a full millennium later than the mainstream Kurgan hypothesis. In this, it figures as an opposite to the Anatolian hypothesis, in spite of the geographical proximity of the respective Urheimaten suggested, diverging from the timeframe suggested there by full three millennia.
Notes
- ^ Colin Renfrew, Archaeology and Language, 159-60
- ^ T. V. Gamkrelidze and V. V. Ivanov, The Early History of Indo-European Languages, Scientific American, March 1990
See also
- Competing hypotheses
- Anatolian hypothesis
- Broad Homeland hypothesis
- Kurgan hypothesis
- Out of India theory
- Paleolithic Continuity Theory
References
- T. V. Gamkrelidze and V. V. Ivanov, The Early History of Indo-European Languages, Scientific American, March 1990
- I.M. Diakonoff, The Prehistory of the Armenian People (1984).
- Robert Drews, The Coming of the Greeks (1988), argues for late Greek arrival in the framework of the Armenian hypothesis.
- Martiros Kavoukjian, Armenia, Subartu, and Sumer : the Indo-European homeland and ancient Mesopotamia, trans. N. Ouzounian, Montreal (1987), ISBN 0921885008.