Misplaced Pages

#877122

55-579: The river's name is derived from Proto-Indo-European *karr- 'rock'. It was recorded in the 13th century as Coranna and Corona . Korana rises in the eastern parts of Lika and creates the Plitvice Lakes , a UNESCO World Heritage Site . Downstream from Plitvice Lakes, the Korana river forms a 25 kilometers long border between Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina near Cazin . From there it flows northwards through Croatia, where it finally reaches

110-546: A French Jesuit who spent most of his life in India, had specifically demonstrated the analogy between Sanskrit and European languages. According to current academic consensus, Jones's famous work of 1786 was less accurate than his predecessors', as he erroneously included Egyptian , Japanese and Chinese in the Indo-European languages, while omitting Hindi . In 1818, Danish linguist Rasmus Christian Rask elaborated

165-677: A PIE homeland, the Kurgan and Anatolian hypotheses are the ones most widely accepted, and also the ones most debated against each other. Following the publication of several studies on ancient DNA in 2015, Colin Renfrew, the original author and proponent of the Anatolian hypothesis, has accepted the reality of migrations of populations speaking one or several Indo-European languages from the Pontic steppe towards Northwestern Europe. The table lists

220-468: A common predecessor for both the Anatolian languages and the other Indo-European languages, termed Indo-Hittite or Indo-Anatolian. Although PIE had predecessors, the Indo-Hittite hypothesis is not widely accepted, and there is little to suggest that it is possible to reconstruct a proto-Indo-Hittite stage that differs substantially from what is already reconstructed for PIE. Anthony (2019) suggests

275-549: A conventional mark of reconstructed words, such as * wódr̥ , * ḱwn̥tós , or * tréyes ; these forms are the reconstructed ancestors of the modern English words water , hound , and three , respectively. No direct evidence of PIE exists; scholars have reconstructed PIE from its present-day descendants using the comparative method . For example, compare the pairs of words in Italian and English: piede and foot , padre and father , pesce and fish . Since there

330-565: A derivation of the proto-Indo-European language mainly from a base of languages spoken by Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers living in the Volga steppes, with influences from languages spoken by northern Caucasus hunter-gatherers who migrated from the Caucasus to the lower Volga basin, in addition to a possible later and lesser influence from the language of the Maikop culture to the south (which

385-453: A detailed, though conservative, overview of the lexical knowledge accumulated by 1959. Jerzy Kuryłowicz's 1956 Apophonie gave a better understanding of Indo-European ablaut . From the 1960s, knowledge of Anatolian became robust enough to establish its relationship to PIE. Scholars have proposed multiple hypotheses about when, where, and by whom PIE was spoken. The Kurgan hypothesis , first put forward in 1956 by Marija Gimbutas , has become

440-454: A geographical element) was "decisively" in favour of Anatolia as the geographical origin, and assisted Colin Renfrew's hypothesis that Indo-European spread from Anatolia along with agriculture from 7500 to 6000 BCE onwards. According to their analysis, the five major Indo-European subfamilies – Celtic, Germanic, Italic, Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian – all emerged as distinct lineages between 4000 and 2000 BCE. The authors stated that this time-scale

495-464: A homeland geographically between the Caucasus and the Urals. Thirdly, if the Indo-European languages had spread westwards from Anatolia, it might be expected that Greek would be closest to Anatolian, whereas in fact it is much closer to Indo-Aryan. In addition, the culture described in early poems such as Homer's – praise of warriors, feasting, reciprocal guest-friendship, and so on – more closely match what

550-410: A homeland is both extensive and persuasive [...]. Consequently, other scenarios regarding the possible Indo-European homeland, such as Anatolia, have now been mostly abandoned," although critical issues such as the way the proto-Greek , proto-Armenian , proto-Albanian , proto-Celtic , and proto-Anatolian languages became spoken in their attested homeland are still debated within the context of

605-627: A language. From the 1870s, the Neogrammarians proposed that sound laws have no exceptions, as illustrated by Verner's law , published in 1876, which resolved apparent exceptions to Grimm's law by exploring the role of accent (stress) in language change. August Schleicher 's A Compendium of the Comparative Grammar of the Indo-European, Sanskrit, Greek and Latin Languages (1874–77) represented an early attempt to reconstruct

SECTION 10

#1732772692878

660-595: A lexicon in common, generally related to trade, such as words for "price" and "draw, lead". Similarly, "sell" and "wash" were borrowed in Proto-Ugric . Although some have proposed a common ancestor (the hypothetical Nostratic macrofamily ), this is generally regarded as the result of intensive borrowing, which suggests that their homelands were located near each other. Proto-Indo-European also exhibits lexical loans to or from Caucasian languages, particularly Proto-Northwest Caucasian and Proto-Kartvelian , which suggests

715-400: A location close to the Caucasus mountains. Gamkrelidze and Ivanov , using the now largely unsupported glottalic theory of Indo-European phonology, also proposed Semitic borrowings into Proto-Indo-European, suggesting a more southern homeland to explain these borrowings. According to Mallory and Adams, some of these borrowings may be too speculative or from a later date, but they consider

770-613: A thousand years. According to the prevailing Kurgan hypothesis , the original homeland of the Proto-Indo-Europeans may have been in the Pontic–Caspian steppe of eastern Europe. The linguistic reconstruction of PIE has provided insight into the pastoral culture and patriarchal religion of its speakers. As speakers of Proto-Indo-European became isolated from each other through the Indo-European migrations ,

825-532: Is a stub . You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it . Proto-Indo-European language Pontic Steppe Caucasus East Asia Eastern Europe Northern Europe Pontic Steppe Northern/Eastern Steppe Europe South Asia Steppe Europe Caucasus India Indo-Aryans Iranians East Asia Europe East Asia Europe Indo-Aryan Iranian Indo-Aryan Iranian Others European Proto-Indo-European ( PIE )

880-523: Is a stub . You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it . This Lika-Senj County geography article is a stub . You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it . This Una-Sana Canton geography article is a stub . You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it . This article related to a river in Bosnia and Herzegovina is a stub . You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it . This article related to a river in Croatia

935-422: Is a consistent correspondence of the initial consonants ( p and f ) that emerges far too frequently to be coincidental, one can infer that these languages stem from a common parent language . Detailed analysis suggests a system of sound laws to describe the phonetic and phonological changes from the hypothetical ancestral words to the modern ones. These laws have become so detailed and reliable as to support

990-571: Is based on the post-Anatolian and post-Tocharian IE-languages: Zsolt Simon notes that, although it can be useful to determine the period when the Proto-Indo-European language was spoken, using the reconstructed vocabulary to locate the homeland may be flawed, since we do not know whether Proto-Indo-European speakers knew a specific concept because it was part of their environment or because they had heard of it from other peoples they were interacting with. Proto-Finno-Ugric and PIE have

1045-572: Is believed to have had an elaborate system of morphology that included inflectional suffixes (analogous to English child, child's, children, children's ) as well as ablaut (vowel alterations, as preserved in English sing, sang, sung, song ) and accent . PIE nominals and pronouns had a complex system of declension , and verbs similarly had a complex system of conjugation . The PIE phonology , particles , numerals , and copula are also well-reconstructed. Asterisks are used by linguists as

1100-398: Is consistent with secondary movements such as the expansion of the steppe peoples after 3000 BCE, which they suggest also played a role in the spread of Indo-European languages. The steppe hypothesis seeks to identify the source of the Indo-European language expansion as a succession of migrations from the Pontic–Caspian steppe between the 5th and 3rd millennia BCE. During the early 1980s,

1155-500: Is hypothesized to have belonged to the North Caucasian family) during the later Neolithic or Bronze Age involving little genetic effect. Lexico-statistical studies intended to show the relationship between the various branches of Indo-European languages began during the late 20th century with work by Dyen et al. (1992) and Ringe et al. (2002). Subsequently, a number of authors performed a Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of

SECTION 20

#1732772692878

1210-420: Is increasingly used for the study of ancient population movements. Using comparative linguistics it is possible to reconstruct the vocabulary found in the proto-language, and in this way achieve some knowledge of the cultural, technological and ecological context that the speakers inhabited. Such a context can then be compared with archaeological evidence. This vocabulary includes, in the case of (late) PIE, which

1265-472: Is known of the burial practices of the steppe peoples than the neolithic farmers. The most recent DNA findings from ancient bones as well as modern people show that farmers whose ancestors originated in Anatolia did indeed spread across Europe from 6500 BCE onwards, eventually mixing with the existing hunter-gatherer population. However, about 2500 BCE, a massive influx of pastoralists from the steppe north of

1320-930: Is not possible. Forming an exception, Phrygian is sufficiently well-attested to allow proposals of a particularly close affiliation with Greek, and a Graeco-Phrygian branch of Indo-European is becoming increasingly accepted. Proto-Indo-European phonology has been reconstructed in some detail. Notable features of the most widely accepted (but not uncontroversial) reconstruction include: The vowels in commonly used notation are: Proto-Indo-European homeland Pontic Steppe Caucasus East Asia Eastern Europe Northern Europe Pontic Steppe Northern/Eastern Steppe Europe South Asia Steppe Europe Caucasus India Indo-Aryans Iranians East Asia Europe East Asia Europe Indo-Aryan Iranian Indo-Aryan Iranian Others European The Proto-Indo-European homeland

1375-424: Is the reconstructed common ancestor of the Indo-European language family . No direct record of Proto-Indo-European exists; its proposed features have been derived by linguistic reconstruction from documented Indo-European languages. Far more work has gone into reconstructing PIE than any other proto-language , and it is the best understood of all proto-languages of its age. The majority of linguistic work during

1430-558: The Indian subcontinent became aware of similarities between Indo-Iranian languages and European languages, and as early as 1653, Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn had published a proposal for a proto-language ("Scythian") for the following language families: Germanic , Romance , Greek , Baltic , Slavic , Celtic , and Iranian . In a memoir sent to the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres in 1767, Gaston-Laurent Coeurdoux ,

1485-591: The Neogrammarian hypothesis : the Indo-European sound laws apply without exception. William Jones , an Anglo-Welsh philologist and puisne judge in Bengal , caused an academic sensation when in 1786 he postulated the common ancestry of Sanskrit , Greek , Latin , Gothic , the Celtic languages , and Old Persian , but he was not the first to state such a hypothesis. In the 16th century, European visitors to

1540-691: The Pontic–Caspian steppe around 4000 BCE . A notable second possibility, which has gained renewed attention during the 2010s and 2020s due to aDNA research, is the Armenian hypothesis , which situates the homeland for archaic PIE (' Indo-Hittite ') south of the Caucasus mountains. Another contender is the Anatolian hypothesis , which puts it in Anatolia c.  8000 BCE . Several other explanations have been proposed, including

1595-478: The 19th century was devoted to the reconstruction of PIE and its daughter languages , and many of the modern techniques of linguistic reconstruction (such as the comparative method ) were developed as a result. PIE is hypothesized to have been spoken as a single language from approximately 4500 BCE to 2500 BCE during the Late Neolithic to Early Bronze Age , though estimates vary by more than

1650-564: The Black Sea, associated with Corded Ware culture , spread from the east. Northern Europeans (especially Norwegians, Lithuanians, and Estonians) get nearly half their ancestry from this group; Spanish and Italians about a quarter, and Sardinians almost none. It is thought that this influx of pastoralists brought the Indo-European languages with them. Steppe ancestry is also found in the DNA of speakers of Indo-European languages in India, especially in

1705-490: The IE languages (a mathematical method used for evolutionary biology to establish relationships between species). A secondary intent of these studies was to attempt to estimate the approximate dates at which the various branches separated from each other. The earlier studies tended to estimate a relatively long time-frame for the development of the different branches. In particular the study by Bouckaert and colleagues (which included

Korana - Misplaced Pages Continue

1760-489: The Indian gene pool. Apart from DNA evidence (see below), Anthony and Ringe (2015) give a number of arguments against the Anatolian hypothesis. First, cognate words for "axle", "wheel", "wagon-pole", and "convey by vehicle" can be found in a number of Indo-European languages ranging from Irish to Tocharian, but not Anatolian. This suggests that Proto-European speakers, after the split with Anatolian, had wheeled vehicles, which

1815-569: The North Adriatic region are sometimes classified as Italic. Albanian and Greek are the only surviving Indo-European descendants of a Paleo-Balkan language area, named for their occurrence in or in the vicinity of the Balkan peninsula . Most of the other languages of this area—including Illyrian , Thracian , and Dacian —do not appear to be members of any other subfamilies of PIE, but are so poorly attested that proper classification of them

1870-527: The Pontic–Caspian steppe and into eastern Europe. Other theories include the Anatolian hypothesis , which posits that PIE spread out from Anatolia with agriculture beginning c. 7500–6000 BCE, the Armenian hypothesis , the Paleolithic continuity paradigm , and the indigenous Aryans theory. The last two of these theories are not regarded as credible within academia. Out of all the theories for

1925-593: The Proto-Indo-European (PIE) homeland in the Pontic-Caspian steppe about 4000 BCE, is the theory supported by most scholars. According to linguist Allan R. Bomhard (2019), the steppe hypothesis proposed by archeologists Marija Gimbutas and David W. Anthony "is supported not only by linguistic evidence, but also by a growing body of archeological and genetic evidence. The Indo-Europeans have been identified with several cultural complexes existing in that area between 4500—3500 BCE. The literature supporting such

1980-455: The Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Kartvelian languages due to early language contact , as well as some morphological similarities—notably the Indo-European ablaut , which is remarkably similar to the root ablaut system reconstructible for Proto-Kartvelian. The Lusitanian language was a marginally attested language spoken in areas near the border between present-day Portugal and Spain . The Venetic and Liburnian languages known from

2035-748: The Y chromosome, which is inherited in the male line. In general, the prestige associated with a specific language or dialect and its progressive dominance over others can be explained by the access to a natural resource unknown or unexploited until then by its speakers, which is thought to be horse-based pastoralism for Indo-European speakers rather than crop cultivation. A number of other theories have been proposed, most of which have little or no academic credence presently (see discussion below ): Traditionally, homelands of linguistic families are proposed based on evidence from comparative linguistics coupled with evidence of historical populations and migrations from archaeology. Presently, genetics via DNA samples

2090-563: The ancestor of proto-Indo-European in the Eastern European/Eurasian steppe or from a hybridization of both steppe and Northwest-Caucasian languages, while "[a]mong comparative linguists, a Balkan route for the introduction of Anatolian IE is generally considered more likely than a passage through the Caucasus, due, for example, to greater Anatolian IE presence and language diversity in the west." The Anatolian hypothesis proposed by archeologist Colin Renfrew places

2145-602: The common origin of Sanskrit, Persian, Greek, Latin, and German. In 1833, he began publishing the Comparative Grammar of Sanskrit, Zend , Greek, Latin, Lithuanian, Old Slavic, Gothic, and German . In 1822, Jacob Grimm formulated what became known as Grimm's law as a general rule in his Deutsche Grammatik . Grimm showed correlations between the Germanic and other Indo-European languages and demonstrated that sound change systematically transforms all words of

2200-485: The discovery of the Indo-European language family. The methods used to establish the homeland have been drawn from the disciplines of historical linguistics , archaeology , physical anthropology and, more recently, human population genetics . The steppe model , the Anatolian model , and the Near Eastern (or Armenian) model are the three main solutions for the Indo-European homeland. The steppe model, placing

2255-582: The effects of hypothetical sounds which no longer exist in all languages documented prior to the excavation of cuneiform tablets in Anatolian. This theory was first proposed by Ferdinand de Saussure in 1879 on the basis of internal reconstruction only, and progressively won general acceptance after Jerzy Kuryłowicz 's discovery of consonantal reflexes of these reconstructed sounds in Hittite. Julius Pokorny 's Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch ('Indo-European Etymological Dictionary', 1959) gave

Korana - Misplaced Pages Continue

2310-426: The following terminology may be used: The Anatolian languages are the first Indo-European language family to have been separated from the main group. Due to the archaic elements preserved in the Anatolian languages, they may be a "cousin" of Proto-Indo-European, instead of a "child", but Anatolian is generally regarded as an early offshoot of the Indo-European language group. The Indo-Hittite hypothesis postulates

2365-654: The main Indo-European language families, comprising the languages descended from Proto-Indo-European. Slavic: Russian , Ukrainian , Belarusian , Polish , Czech , Slovak , Sorbian , Serbo-Croatian , Bulgarian , Slovenian , Macedonian , Kashubian , Rusyn Iranic: Persian , Pashto , Balochi , Kurdish , Zaza , Ossetian , Luri , Talyshi , Tati , Gilaki , Mazandarani , Semnani , Yaghnobi ; Nuristani Commonly proposed subgroups of Indo-European languages include Italo-Celtic , Graeco-Aryan , Graeco-Armenian , Graeco-Phrygian , Daco-Thracian , and Thraco-Illyrian . There are numerous lexical similarities between

2420-477: The most popular. It proposes that the original speakers of PIE were the Yamnaya culture associated with the kurgans (burial mounds) on the Pontic–Caspian steppe north of the Black Sea. According to the theory, they were nomadic pastoralists who domesticated the horse , which allowed them to migrate across Europe and Asia in wagons and chariots. By the early 3rd millennium BCE, they had expanded throughout

2475-409: The neolithic farmers did not. For various reasons, such as the regular sound-changes which the words exhibit, the suggestion that the words might have spread later by borrowing or have been introduced by parallel innovation in the different branches of Indo-European can be ruled out. Secondly, the words borrowed at an early date by Proto-Uralic, as well as those borrowed from Caucasian languages, indicate

2530-573: The outdated but historically prominent North European hypothesis , the Neolithic creolisation hypothesis , the Paleolithic continuity paradigm , the Arctic theory , and the " indigenous Aryans " (or "out of India") hypothesis. These are not widely accepted, and are considered to be fringe theories . The search for the homeland of the Indo-Europeans began during the late 18th century with

2585-403: The possibility of a Caucasian or northwest Iranian homeland for archaic or 'proto-proto-Indo-European' (also termed 'Indo-Anatolian' or ' Indo-Hittite ' in the literature), the common ancestor of both Anatolian languages and early proto-IE (from which Tocharian and all other early branches divided). These suggestions are disputed in other recent publications, which still locate the origin of

2640-554: The pre-PIE homeland in Anatolia about 8000 BCE, and the homeland of Proto-Indo-European proper in the Balkans around 5000 BCE, with waves of linguistic expansion following the progression of agriculture in Europe. Although it has attracted substantive attention and discussions, the datings it proposes are at odds with the linguistic timeframe for Proto-Indo-European, and with genetic data which do not find evidence for Anatolian origins in

2695-468: The proposed Semitic loans *táwros 'bull' and *wéyh₁on- 'wine; vine' to be more likely. Anthony notes that the small number of Semitic loanwords in Proto-Indo-European that are generally accepted by linguists, such as words for bull and silver , could have been borrowed via trade and migration routes rather than through direct contact with the Semitic linguistic homeland. According to Anthony,

2750-426: The proto-Indo-European language. By the early 1900s, Indo-Europeanists had developed well-defined descriptions of PIE which scholars still accept today. Later, the discovery of the Anatolian and Tocharian languages added to the corpus of descendant languages. A subtle new principle won wide acceptance: the laryngeal theory , which explained irregularities in the reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European phonology as

2805-428: The regional dialects of Proto-Indo-European spoken by the various groups diverged, as each dialect underwent shifts in pronunciation (the Indo-European sound laws ), morphology, and vocabulary. Over many centuries, these dialects transformed into the known ancient Indo-European languages. From there, further linguistic divergence led to the evolution of their current descendants, the modern Indo-European languages. PIE

SECTION 50

#1732772692878

2860-493: The river Kupa at Karlovac . The soil of the karst region, through which this river flows consists of limestone . Under certain physical and chemical conditions the river is constantly creating new soil from plants (see: Plitvice Lakes ). The river Slunjčica flows into Korana at Rastoke / Slunj , and the river Mrežnica flows into it at Karlovac . In the Korana exist rich molluscan assemblages composed of 33 species. This Karlovac County geography article

2915-730: The set of correspondences in his prize essay Undersøgelse om det gamle Nordiske eller Islandske Sprogs Oprindelse ('Investigation of the Origin of the Old Norse or Icelandic Language'), where he argued that Old Norse was related to the Germanic languages, and had even suggested a relation to the Baltic, Slavic, Greek, Latin and Romance languages. In 1816, Franz Bopp published On the System of Conjugation in Sanskrit , in which he investigated

2970-500: The steppe model. A notable second possibility, which has gained renewed attention since the 2010s, is the "Near Eastern model", also known as the Armenian hypothesis . It was proposed by linguists Tamaz V. Gamkrelidze and Vyacheslav Ivanov in the early 1980s, postulating relationships between Indo-European and Caucasian languages based on the disputed glottalic theory and related to archaeological findings by Grogoriev. Some recent DNA research has resulted in renewed suggestions of

3025-490: Was the prehistoric linguistic homeland of the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE). From this region, its speakers migrated east and west, and formed the proto-communities of the different branches of the Indo-European language family. The most widely accepted proposal about the location of the Proto-Indo-European homeland is the steppe hypothesis , which puts the archaic, early, and late PIE homeland in

#877122