Is Germanic a subgroup of the Iranian languages?

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Instead of Centum & Satem (100), I prefer to use Decem, Dasam & Dahan (10), so we can say Italic, Greek, Celtic and Tokharian languages are decem, Indian, East Iranian, Armenian, Baltic and Slavic languages are dasam, and west Iranian and Germanic languages are dahan.

So wait east and west Iranic languages actually cluster in closer with other subfamilies than they actually do with each other?

That makes absolutely no sense unless you wish to imply iranic languages to be based on geographic and not genetic

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri In the first post in this thread I have talked about all sound shifts in the Germanic languages (Grimm's law) and then I showed that all of them firstly happened in the Iranian languages. I certainly don't talk about a few words or even some hundreds words but most of words in these languages, as you correctly mentioned "k" sound was originally changed to x (kh sound) in the Germanic languages, I can mention hundreds Iranian words that we see this thing firstly happened in the Iranian language. You can yourself search about it, for example about the English word "hood" or Old High German "huot" (helmet, hat), it relates to Latin "cudo" which means the same: http://www.latin-dictionary.net/definition/15030/cudo-cudonis the proto-Germanic word is khauda (helmet), what are the Old Persian and Avestan words? sudo?!!

And already in the next postings by styrbjorn, he had written that you are wrong.

Kentum and satem stand for a general phenomenon. You can't pick a single word, just because you think you can prove your theory with it.

The id.europ. word for hundred was *kṃtó, for ten *dekṃ. In Germanic it changed to  *χunđa and *teχun and later to mainly hund and  tehan/zehan which became a modern english ten and modern german zehn. So there is no different development for hundred and for ten!

Centum–satem compared to other general isoglosses in Indo-European daughter languages at about 500 BC.
Blue: Centum languages
Red-orange: Satem languages
Orange: Languages exhibiting augment
Green: Languages exhibiting PIE *-tt- > -ss-
Tan: Languages exhibiting PIE *-tt- > -st-
Pink: Languages in which the instrumental, dative, and ablative plurals, as well as certain singulars and duals, exhibit endings beginning in -m-, rather than the usual *-bh-.

Well, theoretically two very close related languages could belong to the satem and the kentum group. But in Cyrus' case, Germanics shall be descend from Scythians. At that time we indeed should expect an satemisation for Germanic, like we have it for Slavic. But there is no satemisation as PakistaniShield said it correct.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri About 5000 years ago all Indo-Europeans spoke a single language named the Proto-Indo-European language, these people migrated to different directions and those cultures that you mentioned were formed in different periods. But the Proto-Germanic language didn't exist before 500 BC, it is exactly the same time Iranian-speaking people (Scythians) invaded northern Europe and destroyed the Lusatian culture.

How do you know, that they all spoke a single language? The Kurgan I and II, which is mainly associated with the PIE reached already from Moldovia till the Ural mountains. Here an PIE language originated already 6500 years BP. But that doesn't mean, that there was just one language in these area, but that there were close related languages. From the kurgan I and II area the language moved west and east. Later all the today know languages evolved, among those of the west germanic, among those in the east Iranic languages.

Scythians did not invade northern Europe. There were some raids into Middle Europe, there are some arrow heads, some scythian artefacts, but nothing, that would indicate a population change, even not an migration in smaller scale. And in those days the area which was in contact with the scythians was those of the Lusatian culture. Cultures that were associated with the Germanics were further to the west. One of these cultures, the jastorf culture evolved around 600 BC and it evolved in northern germany and Jutland and expanded to the south and later to west and east. Would be really interesting, why those Scythians moved to the sea and then south again!

A scythian culture, which was a steppe culture, would as well be very different to the surrounding cultures, if germanics would really be scythians. But that is not the fact.

If I remember correct some of your evidence is, that saxons were saka and that Kermana is the same as Germani. Well, I once wrote, that such equitation is nonsense and nothing has changed.


Edited by beorna - 19-Dec-2013 at 15:14

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri The most important thing is that the answer is not simply no as we thought before, of course it is also difficult to say which one is a subgroup of another one, but the relation between Iranian and Germanic languages is much more than a similarity because their common Indo-European origin.

Cyrus, neither the one nor the other is a sub-group of the other one. The origins of the later iranian people lay inside the Andronowo-culture, while the origins of the later germanic lay inside the corded ware. The Andronowo culture is based on older cultures, e.g. the yamna culture. That means, that the differentiation between the later germanics and iranians is older than 5000 years. But before e.g. evolved as own family, it lasted again several thousand years and the Corded ware people differentiated as well into branches, like Balto-Slavic.

Originally posted by PakistaniShield Originally posted by beorna Absolutely correct. These two linguistic groups are seperated for several thousands of years and Germanic as well did not participate in the satem shift. Which is why Im a bit astonished why this question was brought up in the first place and even more astonished that people are still debating without giving the simple answer: no.

Because there is no myth wacky enough to be not repeated on and on, as it seems

Originally posted by opuslola Originally posted by beorna The blue ones are Vandals. The Alans become one with the Vandals, allthough Geiserich was king of both, all appear under the term of Vandals Since this integrated band of people matriculated into the area of Espanga, and surrounding area, did the Alans in the movement also join with locals? That is, just where did the Cat-Alans come from? Ron

It is unknown what origin Catalonia has, but that it has nothing to do with the Alans is quite sure. Alans were settled in Lusitania and in central parts of the terraconensis, but not in Catalonia. But here was a Goth reign called Gothia or as well Septimania.

Again Germanic is not a subgrouping of the Iranic languages. There are some languages distantly related of the same family that keep certain terminologies while the rest of them leave i. How could Germanic be a subgrouping of Iranic?