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  <1 3334353637 72>
Author
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 Topic: Is Germanic a subgroup of the Iranian languages?
    Posted: 20-Nov-2008 at 23:21
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Apparentely it can be said about Germanic peoples too!!


This is a joke, right?
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
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: 20-Nov-2008 at 23:26
Cyrus, why can't Iranic languages be a subgroup of the Germanic family? if as you claim they are that closely related, then the converse of your argument can also be true.
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: 20-Nov-2008 at 23:31
OK Cyrus, you haven't corrected yourself, so I'll explain your own source to you now.

I said:
''The ancestors of Germanic peoples arrived at Scandinavia in 3rd millennium BC.''

Your source says:
''Archaeological evidence suggests that about 750 bc a relatively uniform Germanic people was located in southern Scandinavia and along the North Sea and Baltic coasts from what is now The Netherlands to the Vistula River.''

AND

"The earliest historical evidence for Germanic is provided by isolated words and names recorded by Latin authors beginning in the 1st century bc."
_________________________________________________________________________
Your source doesn't say anything about the arrival of IE tribes to Scandinavia. The 750BC it mentions refers to the fact that there was a uniform Germanic people located in southern Sweden etc. Please note that I didn't say anything like ''Archaeological evidence suggests that in the 3rd millennium BC a relatively uniform Germanic people was located in southern Scandinavia and along the North Sea and Baltic coasts from what is now The Netherlands to the Vistula River.'' so I don't understand what you meant by ''I try to understand that 3rd millennium BC is the same 750 BC but I can't!!''. There was no reason for it.

I don't mean it as offense, but you could do with reading more thoroughly, really thoroughly and if this won't help, then perhaps some lectures on logics. Your arguments contain numerous non sequuntur.
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 07:02
I am going to repost tommorrow somethings I want you to awnser but first.  Do you mean that I am for an example nationalist biased? And I can say that I am not I am just giving the evidence and you cannot conter them and when you try to prove your claim in for example linguistics you deny proof and you use the wrong method in ordert o prove relations. Second of all you run from ertain arguments and points we make because you cannot counter them. Here you make it sound like kurgans or Tumulus are particalary Iranian when most old IE cultures used them. Who is nationalist biased? You of course.
Do you believe Germanic peoples lived in the Germanic lands before 750 BC? Do you want to prove it when you say "Proto Germanic seems to be the sucsseser in the north of the Corded Ware culture of IE dialects"? If most old IE cultures built burial mounds then what would you mean by "Germanic culture was very characteristically with all the burial mounds"?


Edited by Cyrus Shahmiri - 21-Nov-2008 at 07:24
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 07:30
Originally posted by King John

Cyrus, why can't Iranic languages be a subgroup of the Germanic family? if as you claim they are that closely related, then the converse of your argument can also be true.
Ok, if I say Iranian is a subgroup of the Germanic family, then will you believe the relations between Iranian and Germanic languages?
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 07:37
Originally posted by Slayertplsko

OK Cyrus, you haven't corrected yourself, so I'll explain your own source to you now.

I said:
''The ancestors of Germanic peoples arrived at Scandinavia in 3rd millennium BC.''

Your source says:
''Archaeological evidence suggests that about 750 bc a relatively uniform Germanic people was located in southern Scandinavia and along the North Sea and Baltic coasts from what is now The Netherlands to the Vistula River.''

AND

"The earliest historical evidence for Germanic is provided by isolated words and names recorded by Latin authors beginning in the 1st century bc."
_________________________________________________________________________
Your source doesn't say anything about the arrival of IE tribes to Scandinavia. The 750BC it mentions refers to the fact that there was a uniform Germanic people located in southern Sweden etc. Please note that I didn't say anything like ''Archaeological evidence suggests that in the 3rd millennium BC a relatively uniform Germanic people was located in southern Scandinavia and along the North Sea and Baltic coasts from what is now The Netherlands to the Vistula River.'' so I don't understand what you meant by ''I try to understand that 3rd millennium BC is the same 750 BC but I can't!!''. There was no reason for it.

I don't mean it as offense, but you could do with reading more thoroughly, really thoroughly and if this won't help, then perhaps some lectures on logics. Your arguments contain numerous non sequuntur.
You still pretend to sleep!! Did you say "arrival of IE tribes to Scandinavia" or ''the ancestors of Germanic peoples"? Sorry that I read more thoroughly!! There is a big difference between these two, it is obvious that, similar to Azeris who consider all Turkic tribes who lived before them in Azerbaijan as Azeris, you want to say all IE tribes who lived in Scandinavia before Germanic peoples, were also Germanic, don't you?
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: 21-Nov-2008 at 08:52
You really desperately need those logics lectures, dear Cyrus!Smile

''The ancestors of Germanic peoples'' doesn't indicate at all that they be Germanic, whence have you got it??In fact, it rather indicates that they weren't Germanic, otherwise I wouldn't need to call the  ''the ancestors'', but just ''Germanic tribes''. It just means that they were their ancestors - that statement doesn't refer to the ethnicity of them at all either - they can be Iranian, Chinese, Turkic, Eskimo...whoever, and yes, also Germanic - but it doesn't say the were Germanic. If I say my father is my ancestor, does it mean my father is me??


Edited by Slayertplsko - 21-Nov-2008 at 08:57
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 11:43
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Originally posted by King John

Cyrus, why can't Iranic languages be a subgroup of the Germanic family? if as you claim they are that closely related, then the converse of your argument can also be true.
Ok, if I say Iranian is a subgroup of the Germanic family, then will you believe the relations between Iranian and Germanic languages?
I think everyone agrees that the Iranian and Germanic people are related rather more closely than just by their common humanity.
 
However that two groups of people are related doesn't mean one is a subgroup of the other.
 
Incidentally this thread is homing in on 10,000 views, which is difficult to believe. Smile
 
 
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 12:55
Originally posted by Slayertplsko

You really desperately need those logics lectures, dear Cyrus!Smile

''The ancestors of Germanic peoples'' doesn't indicate at all that they be Germanic, whence have you got it??In fact, it rather indicates that they weren't Germanic, otherwise I wouldn't need to call the  ''the ancestors'', but just ''Germanic tribes''. It just means that they were their ancestors - that statement doesn't refer to the ethnicity of them at all either - they can be Iranian, Chinese, Turkic, Eskimo...whoever, and yes, also Germanic - but it doesn't say the were Germanic. If I say my father is my ancestor, does it mean my father is me??
Do you remember what you wanted to prove when you said it? If the ancestors of Germanic peoples who arrived at Scandinavia in 3rd millennium BC were not Germanic then why would you say "Only in the late 1st millennium BC and early 1st millennium AD some Germanic tribes neighboured some Iranian peoples. Before this time, there was no neighbourhood."?!! Before this time, they were not Germanic tribes, were they?


Edited by Cyrus Shahmiri - 21-Nov-2008 at 12:57
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: 21-Nov-2008 at 13:13
Firstly, it is irrelevant what I wanted to prove, the statement itself doesn't allude any Germanic ethnicity, nor does it link to the following one as to change the meaning. Secondly, about the statement you quoted:

"Only in the late 1st millennium BC and early 1st millennium AD some Germanic tribes neighboured some Iranian peoples. Before this time, there was no neighbourhood."

Before that time, they definitely were Germanic according to your source (in 750BC - uniform Germanic people....). You can have a different definition of the ''late 1st millennium'' since it's a rather relative expression - I would understand even 400 years before the end of the millennium to be ''late'', but I consider it mostly about 250 years before the end. I didn't even hope that 750BC according to you means ''late 1st millennium'', I don't think it's acceptable.

Another very important part of my statement is that ''some'' when referring to Germanic and Iranian peoples - that is crucial if relationship is bound to be discussed.


Edited by Slayertplsko - 21-Nov-2008 at 13:21
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
Back to Top
Some View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 11-Nov-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 168
  Quote Some Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 13:52
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

I am going to repost tommorrow somethings I want you to awnser but first.  Do you mean that I am for an example nationalist biased? And I can say that I am not I am just giving the evidence and you cannot conter them and when you try to prove your claim in for example linguistics you deny proof and you use the wrong method in ordert o prove relations. Second of all you run from ertain arguments and points we make because you cannot counter them. Here you make it sound like kurgans or Tumulus are particalary Iranian when most old IE cultures used them. Who is nationalist biased? You of course.
Do you believe Germanic peoples lived in the Germanic lands before 750 BC? Do you want to prove it when you say "Proto Germanic seems to be the sucsseser in the north of the Corded Ware culture of IE dialects"? If most old IE cultures built burial mounds then what would you mean by "Germanic culture was very characteristically with all the burial mounds"?
 

I mean that it is characteristically of the spread of Indo-Europeans what you can't get is that the IE tribes that became to be known as Germanic first spoke a dialect of PIE. All Indo-European tribes could more or less understand each other for a long time. What we call Germanic in the sence of speakers of Proto-Germanic is am or less reconstruction of the late language speaking of IE speakers in Scandinavia when Grimms law and Verners law was fully evolved. The roman empire mostly got contact with Western Germanic speakers those who moved to the south because of climate change and it became colder and cultural down recession happened for the North-Germanic and also many deaths. It was not anthill the Viking Age more or less thill the north-Germanic culture got back up on it's feet.

Early IE cultural in Scandinavia was characteristic of the type Tumulus or Kurgans that you would find from the Corded Ware(If you would argue on the thesis that they where IE as it is most commonly taught) culture of IE dialects. They where characteristically according to wikipedia.

''Inhumation under flat ground or below small tumuli in a flexed position; On the continent males lay on their right side, females on the left, with the faces of both oriented to the south. However, in Sweden and also parts of northern Poland the graves were oriented north-south, men lay on their left side and women on the right side - both facing east. Originally, there was probably a wooden construction, since the graves are often positioned in a line. This is in contrast with practices in Denmark where the dead were buried below small mounds with a vertical stratigraphy: the oldest below the ground, the second above this grave, and occasionally even a third burial above those. Other types of burials are the niche-graves of Poland. Grave goods for men typically included a stone battle-axe. Pottery in the shape of beakers and other types are the most common burial gifts, generally speaking. Often decorated with cord, but also incisions and other types of impressions.

Late battle axe from Gotland

The approximately contemporary Beaker culture had similar burial traditions, and together they covered most of Western and Central Europe. While broadly related to the Corded Ware culture, the origins of the Bell-Beaker folk are considerably more obscure, and represent one of the mysteries of European pre-history.''

So Cyrus do you start to get it. And also in terms of linguistic you for an example still have not answer to the amateur lexical comparison you do http://www.zompist.com/chance.htm

The time before Proto-Germanic is often referred to dialectical Indo-European i have read that one early change that this dialect of IE went trough was Mora reduction and later that ā/ă - ō/o merged. And those who try figure out who early Germanic or late pre-Germanic indo-European dialect was study in a time boundary at least between 2000 BC to 1000 BC and is mean to find on how the language sounded and worked back then. Grimm’s law and Verners law happened very late. Another interesting thing is tough that some Germanic vocabulary is very hard to find cognates in other IE languages. Some argue that this is because IE tribes that became Germanic lived in isolation for a long time or if it was because a substratum or loans or just new random words or they do have cognates in other IE language but no one has been able to fully prove there thesis and it is still very debated.

All love.

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

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 18:30
Originally posted by Slayertplsko

Firstly, it is irrelevant what I wanted to prove, the statement itself doesn't allude any Germanic ethnicity, nor does it link to the following one as to change the meaning. Secondly, about the statement you quoted:

"Only in the late 1st millennium BC and early 1st millennium AD some Germanic tribes neighboured some Iranian peoples. Before this time, there was no neighbourhood."

Before that time, they definitely were Germanic according to your source (in 750BC - uniform Germanic people....). You can have a different definition of the ''late 1st millennium'' since it's a rather relative expression - I would understand even 400 years before the end of the millennium to be ''late'', but I consider it mostly about 250 years before the end. I didn't even hope that 750BC according to you means ''late 1st millennium'', I don't think it's acceptable.

Another very important part of my statement is that ''some'' when referring to Germanic and Iranian peoples - that is crucial if relationship is bound to be discussed.
 
Nice try! LOL 
 
Now we should find where you found ''late 1st millennium'', this is the article about Scythians in Britannica: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/530361/Scythian
 
You can read in the first lines that Scythian migration to Eastern Europe was in the 8th century BC.


Edited by Cyrus Shahmiri - 21-Nov-2008 at 18:31
Back to Top
eaglecap View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 15-Feb-2005
Location: ArizonaUSA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3959
  Quote eaglecap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 18:58
"The Barbarian's speak" could help answer your question. I do not have my copy with me so I cannot recall the author but I used it on my research about the Celtic and Germanic tribes.
Λοιπόν, αδελφοί και οι συμπολίτες και οι στρατιώτες, να θυμάστε αυτό ώστε μνημόσυνο σας, φήμη και ελευθερία σας θα ε
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: 21-Nov-2008 at 19:23
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Nice try! LOL 


And a successful one inasmuch as you seem to be unable to refute my analysis of my statements (it's pretty damn sad when we need to do this!).
 
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Now we should find where you found ''late 1st millennium'', this is the article about Scythians in Britannica: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/530361/Scythian
 
You can read in the first lines that Scythian migration to Eastern Europe was in the 8th century BC.


Yes, and the Germanic peoples were along the Baltic coast. That isn't the same as southern Russia, since southern Russia is a very broad term (it definitely isn't the neighbourhood of the Baltic states, that's called western Russia). The Scythians just migrated quite close to already established Germanic people, which was situated in Scandinavia, along the North Sea and Baltic coast. So there is no way how the Scythians could be ancestors of Germanic people - at least according to this source.

If you actually read your source further, then it says: Centered on what is now the Crimea, the Scythians founded a rich, powerful empire that survived for several centuries before succumbing to the Sarmatians during the 4th century BC to the 2nd century AD.

The first two clauses are important for us. They arrived at Crimea, not Baltic coast. And what's more, this was obviously later then the arrival to southern Russia, since Crimea isn't in Russia.


Edited by Slayertplsko - 21-Nov-2008 at 19:34
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
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: 21-Nov-2008 at 19:27
Just for future reference:

A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 19:31
Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Originally posted by King John

Cyrus, why can't Iranic languages be a subgroup of the Germanic family? if as you claim they are that closely related, then the converse of your argument can also be true.
Ok, if I say Iranian is a subgroup of the Germanic family, then will you believe the relations between Iranian and Germanic languages?
I think everyone agrees that the Iranian and Germanic people are related rather more closely than just by their common humanity.
 
However that two groups of people are related doesn't mean one is a subgroup of the other.
 
Incidentally this thread is homing in on 10,000 views, which is difficult to believe. Smile
 
Thanks that you consider Iranians as human beings too.
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: 21-Nov-2008 at 19:34
What the hell was that supposed to mean??Confused Are we racists just because we don't want to admit that we are all your slaves Cyrus (to put it in such an extreme way)??

Edited by Slayertplsko - 21-Nov-2008 at 19:35
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
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: 21-Nov-2008 at 19:42
So in conclusion, the Germanic people mentioned in Britannica was situated in Sweden, Denmark and along the coast from Netherlands to Vistula river (ie. Poland). The Scythians, at the time when Germanic peoples were already there, didn't come even close to that area, the came to southern Russia, and probably in the 7th century to Ukraine. Please notice that Russia, apart from the separate Kaliningrad Oblast, doesn't border Poland, and even the area in Ukraine as discribed in Britannica isn't much closer to Vistula. So no, there is no way Scythians could be the ancestors of Germanic peoples.
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
Back to Top
Some View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 11-Nov-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 168
  Quote Some Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 20:21
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Originally posted by King John

Cyrus, why can't Iranic languages be a subgroup of the Germanic family? if as you claim they are that closely related, then the converse of your argument can also be true.
Ok, if I say Iranian is a subgroup of the Germanic family, then will you believe the relations between Iranian and Germanic languages?
I think everyone agrees that the Iranian and Germanic people are related rather more closely than just by their common humanity.
 
However that two groups of people are related doesn't mean one is a subgroup of the other.
 
Incidentally this thread is homing in on 10,000 views, which is difficult to believe. Smile
 
Thanks that you consider Iranians as human beings too.
 
Ehh I have Persian friends and any one fo them who know anything about linguistics and pre-history would prettey much laugh at you. It is very low of you Cyrus to acuse us for being racist just because we disagree with theises . Your trying to make us feel bad I see Cyrus. And I see that you did not respond to my latest repley to you. And that just shows that you run from arguments that go against you claim. If it would be miracle if you mised it. But when I awnser your question I guess you did come up with anything to counter with Cyrus.In my opinion Cyrus your starting to lose this debate and then you feel that you have to aim so low then to argue that we that opose you have problems with Iranian people or culture and that is bullshit. Here is the message again if you missed it (Irony)Tongue 
 
Originally posted by Some

I mean that it is characteristically of the spread of Indo-Europeans what you can't get is that the IE tribes that became to be known as Germanic first spoke a dialect of PIE. All Indo-European tribes could more or less understand each other for a long time. What we call Germanic in the sence of speakers of Proto-Germanic is am or less reconstruction of the late language speaking of IE speakers in Scandinavia when Grimms law and Verners law was fully evolved. The roman empire mostly got contact with Western Germanic speakers those who moved to the south because of climate change and it became colder and cultural down recession happened for the North-Germanic and also many deaths. It was not anthill the Viking Age more or less thill the north-Germanic culture got back up on it's feet.

Early IE cultural in Scandinavia was characteristic of the type Tumulus or Kurgans that you would find from the Corded Ware(If you would argue on the thesis that they where IE as it is most commonly taught) culture of IE dialects. They where characteristically according to wikipedia.

''Inhumation under flat ground or below small tumuli in a flexed position; On the continent males lay on their right side, females on the left, with the faces of both oriented to the south. However, in Sweden and also parts of northern Poland the graves were oriented north-south, men lay on their left side and women on the right side - both facing east. Originally, there was probably a wooden construction, since the graves are often positioned in a line. This is in contrast with practices in Denmark where the dead were buried below small mounds with a vertical stratigraphy: the oldest below the ground, the second above this grave, and occasionally even a third burial above those. Other types of burials are the niche-graves of Poland. Grave goods for men typically included a stone battle-axe. Pottery in the shape of beakers and other types are the most common burial gifts, generally speaking. Often decorated with cord, but also incisions and other types of impressions.

Late battle axe from Gotland

The approximately contemporary Beaker culture had similar burial traditions, and together they covered most of Western and Central Europe. While broadly related to the Corded Ware culture, the origins of the Bell-Beaker folk are considerably more obscure, and represent one of the mysteries of European pre-history.''

So Cyrus do you start to get it. And also in terms of linguistic you for an example still have not answer to the amateur lexical comparison you do http://www.zompist.com/chance.htm

The time before Proto-Germanic is often referred to dialectical Indo-European i have read that one early change that this dialect of IE went trough was Mora reduction and later that ā/ă - ō/o merged. And those who try figure out who early Germanic or late pre-Germanic indo-European dialect was study in a time boundary at least between 2000 BC to 1000 BC and is mean to find on how the language sounded and worked back then. Grimm’s law and Verners law happened very late. Another interesting thing is tough that some Germanic vocabulary is very hard to find cognates in other IE languages. Some argue that this is because IE tribes that became Germanic lived in isolation for a long time or if it was because a substratum or loans or just new random words or they do have cognates in other IE language but no one has been able to fully prove there thesis and it is still very debated.

All love.

 


Edited by Some - 21-Nov-2008 at 20:24
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 16:55

I just replied to gcle2003, I think it is obvious that he meant that Iranians can be related to Germanic peoples, if we consider them as human beings too!!

I mean that it is characteristically of the spread of Indo-Europeans what you can't get is that the IE tribes that became to be known as Germanic first spoke a dialect of PIE.

That dialect of PIE is called "Iranian languages."

What we call Germanic in the sence of speakers of Proto-Germanic is am or less reconstruction of the late language speaking of IE speakers in Scandinavia when Grimms law and Verners law was fully evolved.

Those laws were first evolved in the Iranian languages.



Edited by Cyrus Shahmiri - 22-Nov-2008 at 17:32
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3334353637 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 0.172 seconds.