Indo-Iranian languages

Etymology

The term Indo-Iranian languages refers to the spectrum of Indo-European languages spoken in the Southern Asian region of Eurasia, spanning from the Indian subcontinent (where the Indo-Aryan branch is spoken, also called Indic) up to the Iranian Plateau (where the Iranian branch is spoken, also called Iranic). It was later discovered that the Nuristani languages are also spoken in the isolated region of Nuristan, roughly situated in the intersection of these regions.

This branch is also known as Aryan languages, referring to the languages spoken by Aryan peoples, where the term Aryan is considered as the ethnocultural self-designation of ancient Indo-Iranians. Today, the term Aryan is generally avoided, owing to the perceived negative connotation associated with Aryanism.

Classification

Below is an abridged classification scheme of the Indo-Iranian languages. The Badeshi language remains unclassified within the Indo-Iranian branch.

• Proto-Indo-European (reconstructed)
  • Proto-Indo-Iranian (reconstructed)
    • Proto-Iranian (reconstructed)
      • Iranian languages (Iranic languages)
        • Eastern
        • Western
    • Proto-Nuristani (reconstructed)
      • Nuristani languages
    • Proto-Indo-Aryan (reconstructed)
      • Indo-Aryan languages
        • Dardic
        • Northwestern
        • Northern
        • Western
        • Eastern
        • Southern
        • Chinali-Lahul (unclassified)
    • Badeshi (unclassified)

Origin

All Indo-Iranian languages can be traced back to a single hypothetical ancestral language: Proto-Indo-Iranian, which is the reconstructed proto-language to represent the latest point at which all modern-day Indo-Iranian languages were still unified. Proto-Indo-Iranian, in turn, is classified as belonging to the Indo-European language family, ultimately tracing back to the Proto-Indo-European language.

Historically, the Proto-Indo-Iranian speakers are thought to have originally referred to themselves using the reconstructed Proto-Indo-Iranian root Áryas, from which it derives terms like Aryavarta (, ), Airyanem Vaejah (, ), Alania (Aryāna), Iran (Aryānām), and "Aryan".

The Proto-Indo-Iranian-speakers are generally associated with the Sintashta culture, which is thought to represent an eastward migration of peoples from the Corded Ware culture, which, in turn, is believed to represent an earlier westward migration of Yamnaya-related people from the Pontic–Caspian steppe zone into the territory of late Neolithic European cultures, possibly bringing with them the Proto-Indo-European language. However, the exact genetic relationship between the Yamnaya culture, Corded Ware culture and Sinthasta culture remains unclear.

The earliest known chariots have been found in Sintashta burials, and the culture is considered a strong candidate for the origin of the technology, which spread throughout the Old World and played an important role in ancient warfare. There is almost a general consensus among scholars that the Andronovo culture, the successor of Sintasha culture, was an Indo-Iranian culture. Currently, only two sub-cultures are considered as part of Andronovo culture: Alakul and Fëdorovo cultures. The Andronovo culture is considered as an "Indo-Iranic dialect continuum", with a later split between Iranian and Indo-Aryan languages. However, according to Hiebert, an expansion of the Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex (BMAC) into Iran and the margin of the Indus Valley is "the best candidate for an archaeological correlate of the introduction of Indo-Iranian speakers to Iran and South Asia", despite the absence of the characteristic timber graves of the steppe in the Near East, or south of the region between Kopet Dag and Pamir-Karakorum. J. P. Mallory acknowledges the difficulties of making a case for expansions from Andronovo to northern India, and that attempts to link the Indo-Aryans to such sites as the Beshkent and Vakhsh cultures "only gets the Indo-Iranian to Central Asia, but not as far as the seats of the Medes, Persians or Indo-Aryans". He has developed the Kulturkugel () model that has the Indo-Iranians taking over cultural traits of BMAC, but preserving their language and religion while moving into Iran and India.

Notes

References

Sources

• .

References

1. "Development team".
2. Windfuhr, Gernot. "The Iranian languages". Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.
3. (2007). "The Indo-Aryan languages". Routledge.
4. Mahulkar, D. D.. (1990). "Pre-Pāṇinian Linguistic Studies". Northern Book Centre.
5. (2011). "Linguistic Analysis: From Data to Theory". Walter de Gruyter.
6. (2023). "Indo-Iranian". [[Ethnologue]].
7. "Glottolog 4.7 – Indo-Iranian". [[Glottolog]].
8. Leschber, Corinna. "IranicTurkishBulgarian Language Contact from a Contact semantic Point of view." Journal of Turkish Linguistics 1.1 (2007): 95-115.
9. "Hindi" L1: 322 million (2011 Indian census), including perhaps 150 million speakers of other languages that reported their language as "Hindi" on the census. L2: 274 million (2016, source unknown). Urdu L1: 67 million (2011 & 2017 censuses), L2: 102 million (1999 Pakistan, source unknown, and 2001 Indian census): ''Ethnologue'' 21. {{e21. hin. Hindi. {{e21. ur. Urdu.
10. Asatrian, Garnik. (1995). "DIMLĪ". [[Encyclopedia Iranica]].
11. Paul, Ludwig. (1998). "The Pozition of Zazaki the West Iranian Languages". Open Publishing.
12. (1999). "Nationalities of Armenia". YEGEA Publishing House.
13. Mallory & Adams 1997, p. 213: "Iran Alani (< *aryana) (the name of an Iranian group whose descendants are the Ossetes, one of whose subdivisions is the Iron [< *aryana-)), *aryanam (pl.) 'of the Aryans' (> MPers Iran)."
14. {{harvnb. Schmitt. 1987
15. {{Harvnb. Anthony. 2007
16. (2017). "Re-theorising mobility and the formation of culture and language among the Corded Ware Culture in Europe". Antiquity.
17. (9 October 2019). "The genomic ancestry of the Scandinavian Battle Axe Culture people and their relation to the broader Corded Ware horizon". Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.
18. Pamjav H, Feher T, Nemeth E, Padar Z (2012). "Brief communication: new Y-chromosome binary markers improve phylogenetic resolution within haplogroup R1a1". American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 149 (4): 611–615. doi:10.1002/ajpa.22167. PMID 23115110. "''However, with the discovery of the Z280 and Z93 substitutions within Phase 1 1000 Genomes Project data and subsequent genotyping of these SNPs in ~200 samples, a schism between European and Asian R1a chromosomes has emerged''"
19. (11 May 2023). "The Indo-European Puzzle Revisited: Integrating Archaeology, Genetics, and Linguistics". Cambridge University Press.
20. (2018). "Eurasian Steppe Chariots and Social Complexity During the Bronze Age". [[Journal of World Prehistory]].
21. Raulwing, Peter. (2000). "Horses, Chariots and Indo-Europeans – Foundations and Methods of Chariotry Research from the Viewpoint of Comparative Indo-European Linguistics". Archaeolingua Alapítvány, Budapest.
22. Holm, Hans J. J. G. (2019): The Earliest Wheel Finds, their Archeology and Indo-European Terminology in Time and Space, and Early Migrations around the Caucasus. Series Minor 43. Budapest: ARCHAEOLINGUA ALAPÍTVÁNY. {{ISBN. 978-615-5766-30-5
23. {{harvnb. Mallory. 1997
24. (2021). "Andronovo Problem: Studies of Cultural Genesis in the Eurasian Bronze Age". Open Archaeology.
25. Bjørn, Rasmus G.. (January 2022). "Indo-European loanwords and exchange in Bronze Age Central and East Asia: Six new perspectives on prehistoric exchange in the Eastern Steppe Zone". Evolutionary Human Sciences.
26. Francfort, in {{Harv. Fussman et al.. 2005. Fussman et al.. 2005