PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN
>>>|||<<<
| The Indo-European pre-proto-language
originated
in a homeland in Eurasia by a collection of semi-nomadic clans and
pastoral tribes which more or less could
understand each other (approx 6th
Millennium BCE). As such, we
might better conceive of Pre-Proto Indo-European as a group of related dialects
which evolved from one group ( Indo-Uralic ) of another ( Uralo-Siberian ) group of an earlier ( Eurasiatic) group of the proposed primitive Nostratic parent language
macro-family ( Vladislav Illich-Svitych ).
From the very beginning, multi-ethnic additions have
helped shape it's path thru time to the present. Scholars have determined
the location based on an extensive reconstructed vocabulary of Proto
Indo-European, and the habitat it describes. This was an adaptive
language, one with which they sang, joked, loved, lamented and prayed.
Linguistic evidence indicates that they prayed to *
Deiwos ( = the God of
Light ). These Proto Indo-European
dialects were either of the peripheral tribes, or of the
central tribes. Innovations which occurred within
the central tribal dialects might not be reflected in some of the peripheral
dialects. Migrations due to climate shifts further differentiated the dialects, as
various groups dispersed to seek opportunities. Outside influences on the
peripheral dialects might not
be felt by the central dialects. Multi-ethnic influences were a constant thru
many migrations due to climate change. Thus, it is difficult to say
what "Proto Indo-European" was like if we do not accept
the diversity of that proto language and it's
speakers. Even today, Europe is much like an unmarked ancient sack of mixed
genetic seeds. The migration from North of the Black Sea (approx. 6th Millennium BCE) to the steppes of Russia and beyond to settle the expanse in the North near the Ural mountain range must have coincided with climatic changes. The "Epoch" of Proto Indo-European in the Samara area of Russia was (approx. 5th Millennium BCE) characterized by slow dissolution of tribal groups dispersing due to climate changes and eventually migrating to distant lands. The spread of Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup R1a1 is associated with the spread of the Indo-European languages, too. The vocabulary of these groups adapted to new environments, but enough "core" terms survived to enable the reconstruction of those terms. Click here for more about the reconstructed terms. It is ironic that there are now more students of PIE than there were speakers.
Close to the homeland of Proto-Uralic, the
Lyalovo
(5500-3650 BCE) culture on the upper Volga, it is the
Khvalynsk culture
(5100-4500 BCE) on the middle Volga that spoke PIE. It was itself the local
continuation of the Samara culture (5500-5000 BCE), around the present-day
Russian city of Samara, which must have spoken an more archaic version of
PIE. So now, at any rate, the PIE cradle-land is known with some
precision. Many migrations (especially Corded Ware) coincide, as reflected in their Indo-European lexicons, with the new revolutionary technology of the wheeled wagon, dated 3,500-3,250 BCE at numerous excavated sites. It isn't until more than a millennia later that chariots show up in China. The Beijing Chinese word for wheel is KuLu, which bares an interesting resemblance to nearby Tocharian kokale. (Sūdovian "kaklas") cycle and nom. pl. "kelai") wheels. |
And who were these people? What did they look really like?
Simple. Google "Cherchen Man". His silence speaks volumes.
| The proto-language dialect
of each of these migrating tribes evolved differently from the other dialects.
Many encountered various different ethnic groups that were assimilated and
changed the spoken languages. Some dialects lost and later re-established contact with each other, as in the case
of Baltic and Slavic. The extraordinary lexical correspondences between Thracian
and Baltic imply a long and close relationship. This explains the complex similarities between
those three groups, of which they have many archaic features still worthy
of serious study. Also, some Proto-Indo-European tribes (dialects) maintained
tribal alliances (linguistic contact) up to their various distinct Proto-Stages, as in
the example of Pre-Baltics/
Pre-Thracian/ Pre-Slavic/ Pre-Germanic. The Volga Finnic Erza / Moksha "Mordvin" languages have loanwords from Indo-Iranian, East Baltic, and Tocharian.
It is every bit as speculative to speak of a " Illyric-Daco-Slavic" , or a Thraco-Baltic, than a "Balto-Slavic". Certain lexical correspondences (as in Lithuanian "skaudus, skuja" versus Slavic "xudu, xvoja") bear this out. The period of this mutual contact coincides with Corded Ware culture zone during advent of the wheeled wagon. It was perhaps a combination of climate change and the oxen drawn wagon which prompted the widespread Corded Ware migrations. From historical accounts and ancient traditions, it is certain that hemp use was more than just for cord, cloth, and seed food. Reading from the archaeological record, one can associate dates of 3,200 - 2,300 BCE with various material artifacts and non-native (hemp and wheat) plant pollens that appear to indicate the arrival of "Baltic" speaking peoples in the region around present day Lithuania. A high incidence of Pan-Baltic Y chromosomes from the haplogroup N1c [old name N3] with allele DYS19*15 indicates admixture with older Finnic substrate. The uncommon LWb gene is more specifically a later Central Baltic marker. |
|
The Proto Indo-European language slowly evolved from a dialect of Nostratic, primitive at first, but expressive. With time, it's speakers innovated and assimilated new ways to render it more precise and effective. One innovation lead to another, and eventually the everyday speech of these people resembled something somewhat similar to the reconstructed synthetic proto-language theorized by scholars. It is doubtful that it ever possessed the elegant complexity often set forth about it, or will we know what long lost assimilated ethnic group influenced what. That complexity was nonetheless accomplished later, in both humble and renown languages, all derived from Proto Indo-European. Such are the languages as elevated as Sanskrit, or humble as Lithuanian. Click Here for examples of Prayer in various Indo-European languages. |
|
The transition from active (fientive) to the later, and more complex, declensional system was accomplished using
various "quasi-paradigmatic" adverbial forms in
the dialects. |
| The four cases of
West-Baltic (Prussian, Sudovian & Galindian) declension are not an innovation but an archaic feature uniting West Baltic with Germanic and Greek.
Only nominative, genitive, dative and accusative
forms have constant intercrossing functions in various Indo-European languages,
while forms used for the instrumental or locative cases (traditionally
declared to be "Common Indo-European"), have related functions: e.g.
the IE *"-ois" may occur in the instrumental case in one language
and in the locative case in other ones, or *"-ō" / (apophonically)
"-ē " occurs as "-āt" in the Indo-Iranian ablative and
as "-it" in the Hittite instrumental. Such intercrossing elements were
used for semi-paradigmatic adverbial forms, differently paradigmatized
in the various Indo-European languages. (V. Toporov, V. Maziulis) |
|
"The traditional
academic construct of a seven case declensional system for Proto Indo-European is as synthetic
as it is theoretically convenient." (Jeannette
DeBusk Cox) |
| The differentiation between each dialect became
more pronounced as time went by and different ethnic groups were assimilated. Those dialect tribes that
remained in closer contact later resembled each other more, as in
the case of Baltic, Indo-Iranian,
Germanic, and Slavic
(each with their somewhat similiar grammatical innovations).
In the case of Baltic, with many of it's supra-archaic
qualities, a clearer window into past developments is possible
to determine how such innovations took place. Thus, Baltic
Studies will continue to enrich and redefine Proto-Indo-European
Studies, now and far into the future.
The Sūdovian greeting "Kailas"
re-affirms that we are all One, poshka@hotmail.com |
____________________________
| Proto Baltic | ~ | Nostratic Language | ~ | Mažiulis |
Click Here for Indo-European linguistic studies.
Click Here for TITUS Texts of various Indo-European languages.
Most
of the information above was introduced first by the Scholar Marija Gimbutas.
Marija Gimbutas, in turn, was inspired by the ancient folktales of J. Basanavičius.
from
~ in memory of Jeannette DeBusk Cox ~