Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Is Germanic a subgroup of the Iranian languages?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 72>
Author
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Is Germanic a subgroup of the Iranian languages?
    Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 10:03

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimm%27s_law

Change Germanic (shifted) examples Non-Germanic (unshifted) cognates
*p→f English: foot, German: Fuß, Gothic: fōtus, Icelandic, Faroese: fótur, Danish: fod, Norwegian, Swedish: fot Ancient Greek: πούς (pūs), Latin: pēs, pedis, Sanskrit: pāda, Russian: под (pod), Lithuanian: pėda,
*t→þ English: third, Old High German: thritto, Gothic: þridja, Icelandic: þriðji Ancient Greek: τρίτος (tritos), Latin: tertius, Gaelic treas, Irish: tríú, Sanskrit: treta, Russian: третий (tretij), Lithuanian: trečias
*k→x (x later became h) English: hound, Dutch: hond, German: Hund, Gothic: hunds, Icelandic, Faroese: hundur, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish: hund Ancient Greek: κύων (kýōn), Latin: canis, Gaelic, Irish:
*→hw English: what, Gothic: ƕa ("hwa"), Danish hvad, Icelandic: hvað, Faroese hvat, Norwegian: hva Latin: quod, Gaelic: ciod, Irish: cad, Sanskrit: ka-, kiṃ, Russian: ко- (ko-), Lithuanian: ką'
*b→p English: warp; Swedish: värpa; Dutch: werpen; Icelandic, Faroese: varpa, Gothic wairpan Latin: verber
*d→t English: ten, Dutch: tien, Gothic: taíhun, Icelandic: tíu, Faroese: tíggju, Danish, Norwegian: ti, Swedish: tio Latin: decem, Greek: δέκα (déka), Gaelic, Irish: deich, Sanskrit: daśan, Russian: десять (desyat'), Lithuanian: dešimt
*g→k English: cold, Dutch: koud, German: kalt, Icelandic, Faroese: kaldur, Danish: kold, Norwegian: kald, Swedish: kall, Latin: gelū
*→kw English: quick, Frisian: quick, queck, Dutch: kwiek, Gothic: qius, Old Norse: kvikr, Icelandic, Faroese: kvikur, Swedish: kvick, Norwegian kvikk Lithuanian: gyvas
*→b English: brother, Dutch: broeder, German: Bruder, Gothic: broþar, Icelandic, Faroese: bróðir, Danish, Swedish: broder, Norwegian bror Sanskrit: (bhrātā), Russian: брат (brat), Lithuanian: brolis, Old Church Slavonic: братръ (bratru)
*→d English: door, Frisian: doar, Dutch: deur, Gothic: daúr, Icelandic, Faroese: dyr, Danish, Norwegian: dør, Swedish: dörr Irish: doras, Sanskrit: dwār, Russian: дверь (dver'), Lithuanian: durys
*→g English: goose, Frisian: goes, Dutch: gans, German: Gans, Icelandic: gæs, Faroese: gás, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish: gås Russian: гусь (gus')
*gʷʰ→gw→w English: wife, Proto-Germanic: wiban (from former gwiban), Old Saxon, Old Frisian: wif, Dutch: wijf, Old High German: wib, German: Weib, Old Norse: vif, Icelandic: víf, Faroese: vív, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian: viv Tocharian

I believe these sound changes have been firstly made in the Iranian languages, please search above words in this Avestan Dictionary: http://www.avesta.org/avdict/avdict.htm

English: Avestan

Three: Tishro & Thri (t->th)

Door: Dvara & Taro (d->t)

Foot: Pad & Frabda/Frat (p->f)



Edited by Cyrus Shahmiri - 12-Jun-2008 at 10:04
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061
  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 10:16
But OK, we can discuss it. However, you need to accept both Proto-Iranian and Proto-Germanic as REAL languages - otherwise, you have nothing in hand.
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2810
  Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 10:40
Let's first ignore the simple facts that this is impossible due to the fact that the Germanic peoples are not moved in Iranians?
Secondly, chronology doesn't hold. The first sound shifts are believed to be around 500BC, while archaeology shows that the Germanic peoples populated southern Scandinavia and northern Germany before 1000BC. Conclusion is that the change was local, and not imported.

And even if you want to ignore archaeology (and real linguists' papers), you still need to show that all same changes occured in Iranian - and no other changes. Otherwise you haven't shown any correlation. Three examples proves nothing.


Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 13:47
Slayertplsko, Where did you find this 2500 BC? Would you please tell me your sources?
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic : Proto-Germanic is the stage of the language constituting the most recent common ancestor of the attested Germanic languages, dated to the latter half of the first millennium BC. (500 BC-50 BC)
 
Do you want that I show several other sources which confirm it?
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 14:09
Originally posted by Styrbiorn

Let's first ignore the simple facts that this is impossible due to the fact that the Germanic peoples are not moved in Iranians?
Secondly, chronology doesn't hold. The first sound shifts are believed to be around 500BC, while archaeology shows that the Germanic peoples populated southern Scandinavia and northern Germany before 1000BC. Conclusion is that the change was local, and not imported.

And even if you want to ignore archaeology (and real linguists' papers), you still need to show that all same changes occured in Iranian - and no other changes. Otherwise you haven't shown any correlation. Three examples proves nothing.


What a conclusion!! Confused Do you think in 500 BC Germanic peoples suddenly decided to make these sound changes?! In this case you should also believe that in 650 AD Egyptians made some changes in their language and spoke Arabic, also about peoples of Turkey, south America, Australia, ...
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2810
  Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 14:30
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

What a conclusion!! Confused Do you think in 500 BC Germanic peoples suddenly decided to make these sound changes?! In this case you should also believe that in 650 AD Egyptians made some changes in their language and spoke Arabic, also about peoples of Turkey, south America, Australia, ...


It's not my idea - it even says so in the link you posted. Careful research based on loan words shows that these changes started to occur in the 6th century BC, which pretty much destroys your theory. Before you start making up theories, I suggest you to do a little literature study. Try for example Historical Linguistics, by Lyle Campbell.
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061
  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 15:41
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Slayertplsko, Where did you find this 2500 BC? Would you please tell me your sources?
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic : Proto-Germanic is the stage of the language constituting the most recent common ancestor of the attested Germanic languages, dated to the latter half of the first millennium BC. (500 BC-50 BC)
 
Do you want that I show several other sources which confirm it?


You didn't read my post (maybe I should have said their ancestors, but still, you didn't read my post). And if you want sources that confirm what I said:

http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/books/pgmc01.html

Here it says: PGmc may be dated from approximately 2500 B.C. to the beginning of our era, a period during which it underwent numerous changes. (my source can't be edited)

This means that its slow developement was started by the arrival of IE peoples to Scandinavia, and ended with Grimm's shift (beginning of our era).

And as you probably (don't) know, Nordic Bronze Age is considered a direct predecessor and origin of Germanic peoples...again, your favourite wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Bronze_Age


Edited by Slayertplsko - 12-Jun-2008 at 15:45
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 15:45
It's not my idea - it even says so in the link you posted. Careful research based on loan words shows that these changes started to occur in the 6th century BC
In which language? Lets read it again:

Chronology and history of Germanic Consonant Shift

"For the date of the 1st sound shift, we can use the word hanf, which comes from the Greek word kannabis. This word is a loan word out of Scythian, which did not enter Greek till the 5th century BC. In Germanic we meet the word in its shifted form *hanap-. Since Germanic could not have borrowed this word very early, we can assert that at this time the rules *k > h and *b > p were still in force. But it does not tell us how long this rule had existed. That it no longer was in force in the 3rd and 2nd centuries before Christ can be concluded from loan words from Latin, none of which have shifted forms."

Then we read it says: "A Scythian source for the 'hemp'-word is reasonable enough, given Old Persian <kanab> and alleged cognates in Finno-Ugric. But why on earth would Greek intermediation be necessary to get a Scythian word into Germania?"
 
I think it is obvious that "Hanap" was itself a Scythian word, there are several similar words that we see "k" becomes "h" in Iranian languages, about the next sound shift, we know Old Persian "Kanab" has been changed to "Kanap" in Middle Persian (b->p [Grimm's law]) and then "Kenaf" (p->f [Grimm's law]), this word has also gone into English as a loan word from Persian.
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061
  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 15:54
And 'ale' has gone into Iranian from Germanic...so what??
Your article is about the last stage of Germanic...so what??
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 16:07
Originally posted by Slayertplsko

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Slayertplsko, Where did you find this 2500 BC? Would you please tell me your sources?
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic : Proto-Germanic is the stage of the language constituting the most recent common ancestor of the attested Germanic languages, dated to the latter half of the first millennium BC. (500 BC-50 BC)
 
Do you want that I show several other sources which confirm it?


You didn't read my post (maybe I should have said their ancestors, but still, you didn't read my post). And if you want sources that confirm what I said:

http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/books/pgmc01.html

Here it says: PGmc may be dated from approximately 2500 B.C. to the beginning of our era, a period during which it underwent numerous changes. (my source can't be edited)

This means that its slow developement was started by the arrival of IE peoples to Scandinavia, and ended with Grimm's shift (beginning of our era).

And as you probably (don't) know, Nordic Bronze Age is considered a direct predecessor and origin of Germanic peoples...again, your favourite wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Bronze_Age
 
"PGmc may be dated from approximately 2500 B.C. to the beginning of our era."
 
I think this sentence is the result of all researches about Pro-Germanic "imaginary" language, it is really the best approximation! 2500 years! LOL
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 16:17
Originally posted by Slayertplsko

And 'ale' has gone into Iranian from Germanic...so what??
Your article is about the last stage of Germanic...so what??
If it is proved that Germanic is a subgroup of the Iranian languages then these words can be considered as common words, not loan words.
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061
  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 16:21
No it's mostly archaeological evidence...read the Nordic Bronze Age.

So, if you don't accept PGmc, then why have you started this thread...in this case, neither PIE and PIranian existed, so they could not have been ancestral to Germanics.

Now, were you on drugs when you compared Saxon to Persian??? WHY?? Proto languages are imaginary so there is no connection between Persian and Scythian, between Avestan and Persian, and between Avestan and Scythian...was Avestan ever spoken in nothern Europe?? Nope. Neither was Germanic spoken in Pontic steppe (until 3rd century...Gothic) or Greater Iran.

Anyway, if you read my link further:

The only textual material contemporary with [late] Proto-Germanic is recorded in classical authors, or maintained in borrowings into other languages as exemplified by Finnish kuningas 'king'. Classical texts chiefly include proper names, such as Khariomēros in Greek and Langobardi in Latin texts.

You constantly contradict yourself and have no idea what you're talking about (I could post a few of your quotes again, but I think all know it...).


Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061
  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 16:23
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Originally posted by Slayertplsko

And 'ale' has gone into Iranian from Germanic...so what??
Your article is about the last stage of Germanic...so what??
If it is proved that Germanic is a subgroup of the Iranian languages then these words can be considered as common words, not loan words.


But it's not proved..and you're not gonna prove it, because you would need to have studied BOTH (again, I can prove by the stupidity of some of your claims...no offence).

And it was YOUR source bro.

Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061
  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 16:26
Correct me if I'm wrong.
You posted the source for 'ale' to prove that it had got into Germanic through Scythian, but didn't read it carefully enough.
Back to Top
Roberts View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

aka axeman

Joined: 22-Aug-2005
Location: Riga
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1138
  Quote Roberts Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 16:27
maybe Iranian is subgroup of Germanic
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061
  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 16:29
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

I think this sentence is the result of all researches about Pro-Germanic "imaginary" language, it is really the best approximation! 2500 years! LOL


No, it's 'approximately 2500BC' and 'beginning of our era'...it was a slow developement, that's all...but you're using these 'imaginary' languages to support your claims, so calm down.
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061
  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 16:31
Originally posted by Roberts

maybe Iranian is subgroup of Germanic


Next on turn are either Slavs or Balts...no we've been through Slavs, but Balts weren't Iranian yet, so get ready RobertsBig%20smile
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 17:37
Originally posted by Slayertplsko

Correct me if I'm wrong.
You posted the source for 'ale' to prove that it had got into Germanic through Scythian, but didn't read it carefully enough.
 
You are wrong, Styrbiorn knows that I had posted it some months ago too, this is originally a Saxon/Scythian word which can be found in both Iranian and Germanic, as a subgroup of Iranian languages.
 
Meanwhile please use more polite words.
Back to Top
King John View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 01-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1366
  Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 18:58
Cyrus, I believe that the post Slayerplsko is referring to is this post posted on or about June 10 and can be found on page 8 of the Learning a Scandinavian language thread:
Ale, form Old English Alo, Old Saxon/Scythian Alu (Beer):

http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=/data/cauc/caucet&text_number=1450&root=config

It is certainly an old Iranian (Scythian) loanword, ultimately going back to a Germanic source (Proto-Germanic *aluđ 'beer' < PIE *alut-). The root is still present in Osset. älūton, and was also borrowed (probably from an early Ossetian source) into Georg. ludi (dial. aludi) 'beer' - ...
If you actually read what the source says you will find that it says nothing about Saxon. What the source actually says is:
This Avar-Tsez isogloss is rather interesting, because it is certainly an old Iranian (Scythian) loanword, ultimately going back to a Germanic source (Proto-Germanic *aluđ 'beer' < PIE *alut-). The root is still present in Osset. älūton, and was also borrowed (probably from an early Ossetian source) into Georg. ludi (dial. aludi) 'beer' - see Abayev 1,130-131. Regardless of whether this loanword penetrated East Caucasian languages during the period of the Avaro-Ando-Tsezian unity or somewhat later, it must have been borrowed before the change *l > r occurred in Avaro-Andian (unfortunately, Tsez. -r- here is uninformative: it can go back to both PTs *-r- and -l-).
It is clear that you did not read this page very carefully or that you just hoped nobody else would read the site. It is clear when one places your quote in context that the word is not lent to Germanic languages but rather lent from Germanic through Old Iranian. This would suggest that Iranian is a Germanic subgroup and not the other way around. Also notice that Saxon is not mentioned only Scythian. There is no evidence that Scythian and Saxon are the same so quit with the Saxon/Scythian rubbish. This rubbish has already been disproved. You are the only one who makes such a incorrect misguided connection.


Edited by King John - 28-Nov-2008 at 15:17
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061
  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 19:04
Exactly this one.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 72>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.