Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Society & CultureLanguages · 10 years ago

how it is possible that Sanskrit is related with Greek and Latin?

how they are similar and different and when developed sanskrit? how introduced to which parts of India and how quickly spread and how?

how it is possible to be similar to Greek or Latin? how much so? and why it is associated with Aryans? as Greeks and Romans werent Aryans necessarily were they?

6 Answers

Relevance
  • 10 years ago
    Favourite answer

    "Aryan" refers to a group of Indo-Iranian people who descended on Central and South Asia from the Pontic Steppe (the homeland of the Proto-Indo-European people) around 1800 BC. The early Indo-Aryans arrived in northwest India and Pakistan around this time, and would gradually mix in with the local civilizations of the Indus valley (it has long been held that the Aryans conquered the native peoples of India, but there's little archeological evidence to support this), their language attaining some degree of hegemony over these people by virtue of the fact that it was the language of Hinduism.

    Some Hindu ultra-nationalists will argue that Sanskrit originated within India, and is in fact, a Dravidian language, but Sanskrit is markedly Indo-European, and bears no resemblance to languages such as Tamil. However, they view this "native Aryan" hypothesis as integral to Indian and Hindu identity, despite how pseudo-scientific it is.

    In any event, Sanskrit, Latin, and Greek are all Indo-European languages, meaning that they shared a common linguistic ancestor, known as Proto-Indo-European. Proto-Indo-European (PIE) was spoken in an area called the Pontic Steppe, between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, in what is now Russia. Around 2000 BC, the Indo-Europeans began to migrate away from their homeland in all directions. The Indo-Aryans were of an Indo-Iranian stock (in fact, the names "Aryan" and "Iran" derive from the same root), and spoke an Indo-Iranian language, closely related to Avestan, an early Eastern Iranian language spoken in what is now Iran.

    Sanskrit is a fascinating and complex language, but it contains many features that bear a striking resemblance to Ancient Greek, Latin, Avestan, Tocharian, and many other ancient Indo-European languages. It is important to understand that these languages derive their relation from the fact that they all descended from a common ancestor-- also understand that the "Aryans" were a subset of Indo-European peoples who migrated to India. This is not a name for the Indo-European peoples as a whole. The Greeks, Romans, Germanic Peoples, Slavs, and all other Indo-European groups are by no measure "Aryan" and this is not a prerequisite for a genealogical relationship to exist between the languages.

    If you study Sanskrit, or any modern Indo-Aryan language (e.g. Hindi, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujarati), you will note a wealth of cognates (for example, confer Hindi "do" (two) with English "two", Spanish "dos", Portuguese "dois", etc) and analogous structures.

    Core vocabulary (words that are unlikely to change over time, as they will be in common usage regardless of environment or culture) is usually one of the first things examined when determining whether or not languages are related. A good deal of the core vocabulary of Sanskrit, and other Indo-Aryan languages have clear cognates in Indo-European languages belonging to different branches of the family. Even some that may not seem to have clear cognates may be related to words in other languages that have acquired somewhat different meanings-- for example, the Hindi word "kutta" (dog) doesn't bear a resemblance to the Czech word "pes", but is in fact a cognate of "kurva" (cf. Spanish "puta" which has the same meaning as the Czech word and is also a cognate of the Hindi word).

    Source(s): Linguistics student
  • 10 years ago

    Aryan is in origin the same word as Iran which the Shah of Persia adopted after a visit to Hitler, who used "Aryan" (incorrectly) as a synonym of Indo-Germanisch (German for Indo-European). I began my own study of historical linguistics from a book I found in a second-hand shop. This contrasted the simple vowel system of Sanskrit with that of other Indo-European languages and claimed this showed the "purity" of Sanskrit: the vowels of all the others being distortions of their primitive form. Unfortunately my book had been published in 1870. Years later the discovery of Hittite (spoken in Asia Minor) proved the contrary: that the original common Indo-European ancestor language had had a quite complicated vowel system and that its simplification in Sanskrit was the most obvious result of how that language had been influenced by the phonetic habits of the early Indians who had spoken Dravidian languages before adopting the Sanskrit of the Aryan invaders. Apart from that however, Sanskrit, Hittite, and the primitive Greek spoken on Bronze-Age Crete are the earliest documented Indo-European languages and our chief source to understanding what the original late Stone Age common Indo-European must have been like. Compared to these languages of the third millenium BC, Latin is not documented before c.400 BC, Gothic (the earliest known Germanic language) before 300 AD, English not before 600 AD, and Old (liturgical) Bulgarian (the earliest documented Slav language) not before 700 AD. But just as an example of how rapidly they all changed, even primitive Greek had already turned every initial S into an H. On the other hand Hittite watar is closer to its English and Dutch cognate water than to the Classical Greek hydros.

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    The first to understand the connection between Greek, Latin and Sanskrit was Sir William Jones (Sept. 28, 1746-April 27, 1794) who said: "... no philologer could examine them all three, without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which, perhaps, no longer exists. There is a similar reason, though not quite so forcible, for supposing that ... Gothick ... had the same origin with the Sanscrit; and the old Persian might be added to the same family...."

    Sanskrit is still used in modern India, although it is not the same as the language in which the Rig Veda was written, but then Chaucer wrote (Middle) English, which is different enough that it takes a lot of help for a (Modern) English-speaker to get through the Canterbury Tales

    Sanskrit (संस्कृतम् saṃskṛtam [sə̃skɹ̩t̪əm], originally संस्कृता वाक् saṃskṛtā vāk, "refined speech"), is a historical Indo-Aryan language and the primary liturgical language of Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism.[note 1] Today, it is listed as one of the 22 scheduled languages of India[2] and is an official language of the state of Uttarakhand.[3]

    Classical Sanskrit is the standard register as laid out in the grammar of Pāṇini, around the 4th century BCE. Its position in the cultures of Greater India is akin to that of Latin and Greek in Europe and it has significantly influenced most modern languages of the Indian subcontinent, particularly in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Nepal.[4]

    The pre-Classical form of Sanskrit is known as Vedic Sanskrit, with the language of the Rigveda being the oldest and most archaic stage preserved, its oldest core dating back to as early as 1500 BCE.[5] This qualifies Rigvedic Sanskrit as one of the oldest attestations of any Indo-Iranian language, and one of the earliest attested members of the Indo-European language family, the family which includes English and most European languages.[6]

    The corpus of Sanskrit literature encompasses a rich tradition of poetry and drama as well as scientific, technical, philosophical and Hindu religious texts. Sanskrit continues to be widely used as a ceremonial language in Hindu religious rituals in the forms of hymns and mantras. Spoken Sanskrit is still in use in a few traditional institutions in India and there are many attempts at revival.

    Sanskrit is found in every part of India but in different forms.Malayalam,Tamil etc. are derived from Sanskrit.

  • 7 years ago

    Because of your (Caucasion race) ancestors ---Indo-Europeans (white Indians)---- they worshiped Buddhas (swastika), which are the ones dominated the Europe in the period before the flood.

    Modern-day Caucasians have their tongue passed down from those survivors who spoke Indo-European language.

    That was why :)

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 4 years ago

    1

    Source(s): Secrets of Great Investments http://teres.info/TheTradingCode/?aH7B
  • 4 years ago

    Sanskrit Greek Latin

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.