Sanskrit - oldest language

Sanskrit is a very beautiful sounding language...One of the oldest, most of today's language have originated from this...Hence computer is supposed to have lot of it's base in this language...

Aham snihyaami Sanskrite :) (I hope I got the Locative case right)

One of the oldest, most of today's language have originated from this...

Only the Indo-European languages :)

Well, technically it is on one of the BRANCHES of the indo-European families. I suppose some modern Indian languages originated from it..... Farsi is a close-ish cousin, most others are distant cousins.

The fun about Sanskrit, IMHO, is that it has pretty much the whole set of Indo-European grammar, verb forms and so forth in a fairly pure and complete version.... which of course makes sanskrit verbs hell to learn but fun to observe... :D

The OLDEST written indo-European language is, however, Hittite, not Sanskrit, at least as far as the actual documents are concerned..... and Greek in its bronze Age form (written in linear B) also goes back to the mid-second millennium BC, which should be earlier than the earliest sanscrit documents....

Nevertheless, Sanskrit has a completeness that is absolutely awesome :)

Well, technically it is on one of the BRANCHES of the indo-European families. I suppose some modern Indian languages originated from it..... Farsi is a close-ish cousin, most others are distant cousins.

Distant, but still originating from there. It's a fact, I think.

The OLDEST written indo-European language is, however, Hittite, not Sanskrit, at least as far as the actual documents are concerned..... and Greek in its bronze Age form (written in linear B) also goes back to the mid-second millennium BC, which should be earlier than the earliest sanscrit documents....

I'm not sure if some of the Rigveda hymns can't beat that :)

Nevertheless, Sanskrit has a completeness that is absolutely awesome :)

OMG this is so true!! :love:

Distant, but still originating from there. It's a fact, I think.

No, actually. This is generally agreed. The Indian branches moved east, and the European branches moved west..... the languages originate somewhere in the middle, in the plains south of Russia, perhaps around the Caucasus, or possibly a little furtehr West. I can't exactly remember the argument, but it is alla bout some words for plkants and animals they have in common and that only all exist in a fairly small area.


The RIgveda hymns are undoubtedly old, but I'd be surprised if the earliest actual written version would go all the way back to the mid-2nd Millennium. Oral traditions are difficult to date, and depend on the state of the language compared to other stages of development. Both Hittite (especially!) and Greek (in rather pathetic small scraps) are actually attested in original documents of the Bronze Age. How old are the oldest Indian written documents? I know there are the Harappa tablets, which are older, but to my knowledge these haven't been deciphered (I am assuming that they had been if they had been in Indo-European - this is how they cracked Hittite). What's the oldest actual evidence for the existence of actual WRITTEN sanskrit? I am assuming the vedic hymns (like the Iliad and odyssey) were an oral tradition of the second Millennium, written down at some point in the first Millennium?

As far as I understand it, Sanskrit is considered particularly old in terms of linguistics because it was 'frozen' in a very ancient state because of its sacred nature, while spoken language continued to develop into other languages....

However, don't confuse 'oldest' with 'ancestor of all others'. That's simply not the case. :) In fact, according to tradiotional scholarship at least, there is a whole branch of Indo-European that must have split from the ancestors of Sanskrit, Persian and Slavonic (!!!) long before they arrived at their final locations.... Those are all the western Indoeuropean languages, from which most European languages descend (Greek is in a catgory of its own).

All these have a common ancestor (the hypothetical reconstructed Indoeuropean) but there is no direct line of ancestry. This is why 'distant cousins' is a reasonable term to use. :)



EDIT: note that I don't want to diminish the beauty or importance of Sanskrit. it WAS the key to understanding the links between Indo-European languages. :) But I think Sanskrit is awesome enough to deserve an accurate account of its place in linguistic history. :)

Sanskritam Sarve Bhasharambhahaasthi....

Sansrkit is the origin of all languages. Well, almost. The speciality of Sanskrit is that it is completely ERROR-FREE. No confusions. No difficulties. No one/two choice errors.

That is why I love Sanskrit.

Sansrkit is the origin of all languages. Well, almost.
No, not even almost.

Sanskrit is a language within the Indo-Iranian branch of the Indo-European language family. There are 8 other recognized main branches of the Indo-European family, and more than 70 other recognized language families that are completely separate from the Indo-European family and are not descended from any Indo-European language.

Check Ethnologue's list --> http://www.ethnologue.com/family_index.asp
http://www.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=90017

And their classification of Sanskrit --> http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=san

This site doesn't seem very reliable - they list the Old Church Slavonic as originating from Russia, which is definitely not true. And for Bulgaria they have listed both Bulgarian and Turkish as official/national languages - which is absolutely false! Bulgaria has only one official and national language - Bulgarian.

Well, even if that list isn't entirely accurate, what Pox Voldius says is at least accurate in principle.

Sanskrit is a very venerable language, but it is NOT the origin of all languages. It is the ancestor of some of the Indian languages. That's it. It was also significant in allowing some people to recognise that there were similarities between Indian languages and Western European languages, which led to the discovery of Indo-European and plenty of other discoveries about the history of those particular languages, and language development in general.

As I have said before here - Sanskrit is an amazing language, and its history, development and role in linguistics are truly fascinating.

But I don't think one does anyone any favours to falsify its history, or its role in the history of languages.

I know it's not the source of all languages, and I have never said that. However, it is related to all Indo-European languages, and that's a linguistic fact.

My post was only to express doubt in the site's credibility (the two facts I pointed out are most definitely wrong), not in Pox Voldius's post. :)

I understand what you are saying..... I believe very strongly that one just has to be careful about these things, and I wanted to make sure that even if the website is compromised, the main argument is not. As a historian I see things like this often, and in my experience this sort of argument very easily leads to rather unreflected nationalist sentiment which does no-one any good.

Therefore I rather like to keep the established facts clear: historically awesome objects/concepts/memories ... and languages deserve that sort of treatment, IMHO. Better to appreciate them for what they are, rather than for something they are not and also don't need in order to be recognised as awesome.

It is of course absolutely true that Sanskrit is related to all other Indo-European languages - but like one branch (with smaller, younger branches growing from it) on the tree, rather than the trunk of the whole tree, if you know what I mean.


However, as far as I understand it is the Indo-European language with the fullest most regular system of verb forms (a scarily but also impressively HUGE table, even compared with ancient Greek) and that's pretty cool.

I assume that this sort of completist regularity goes well beyond verb forms, but the verb forms are the bit I have actually come across, with great awe. :D


I counted a few lingusts (with an Indo-European specialism) among my friends when I was an undergraduate, and to them at least Sanskrit was crucial to understand how the whole language group ticks. :) Now THAT's awesome in my book. :)

This site doesn't seem very reliable - they list the Old Church Slavonic as originating from Russia, which is definitely not true. And for Bulgaria they have listed both Bulgarian and Turkish as official/national languages - which is absolutely false! Bulgaria has only one official and national language - Bulgarian.
Interesting...because that site was actually on a hand-out list of online resources that one of my linguistics professors at USC gave us in class. (Though...I think the languages that particular professor was most interested in, IIRC, were Dyirbal and the languages of the Caucasus region...)

I understand what you are saying..... I believe very strongly that one just has to be careful about these things, and I wanted to make sure that even if the website is compromised, the main argument is not. As a historian I see things like this often, and in my experience this sort of argument very easily leads to rather unreflected nationalist sentiment which does no-one any good.

Therefore I rather like to keep the established facts clear: historically awesome objects/concepts/memories ... and languages deserve that sort of treatment, IMHO. Better to appreciate them for what they are, rather than for something they are not and also don't need in order to be recognised as awesome.

Oh yes, I think I know exactly what you mean, this sort of grandomaniac attitude to history is prevalent where I live. And I would admit I could be biased, because I'm an indologist (it's a philological discipline in my university).

It is of course absolutely true that Sanskrit is related to all other Indo-European languages - but like one branch (with smaller, younger branches growing from it) on the tree, rather than the trunk of the whole tree, if you know what I mean.

I do, and I agree.

However, as far as I understand it is the Indo-European language with the fullest most regular system of verb forms (a scarily but also impressively HUGE table, even compared with ancient Greek) and that's pretty cool.

I assume that this sort of completist regularity goes well beyond verb forms, but the verb forms are the bit I have actually come across, with great awe.

It has a fantastic noun system as well, and its syntax is just amazing. It also has practically inexhaustible resources in word-formation, and its function as a court poetry laguage, continuously pushed in poetry contests and such, has provided it with extraordinarily rich vocabulary and exquisite stylistic features. It's the language of classical Sanskrit drama and the rasa theory is rooted in the structure of this language. Not to mention the extensive linguistic and literary theorizing done on its basis since the 5th century BC. It's as close to perfect as a language can get - in my experience.

Interesting...because that site was actually on a hand-out list of online resources that one of my linguistics professors at USC gave us in class. (Though...I think the languages that particular professor was most interested in, IIRC, were Dyirbal and the languages of the Caucasus region...)

I don't know about the rest of the site, but I can bet my head that Old Church Slavonic doesn't originate from Russia and that Bulgaria only has one official/national language. The information on those two is definitely incorrect. That's all I was saying, and I honetly didn't mean to imply what you said is not credible by association, really! :)

I don't know about the rest of the site, but I can bet my head that Old Church Slavonic doesn't originate from Russia and that Bulgaria only has one official/national language. The information on those two is definitely incorrect. That's all I was saying, and I honetly didn't mean to imply what you said is not credible by association, really! :)
Hrm, I went to look at what the site said... I think they must have separate (and misleading) definitions for "official" and "national" languages, or something... Elsewhere on the site, on the Turkish page, they just say that it has "Official regional recognition" and had 845,550 speakers in Bulgaria in 1986 (22 years ago, so quite out-dated). Don't know what's going on with their saying that Old Church Slavonic is a language of Russia, without saying that it was a language of Bulgaria first, though. They did categorize it as being in the same "South Eastern Slavic" branch as Bulgarian. :shrug:

.... its function as a court poetry laguage, continuously pushed in poetry contests and such, has provided it with extraordinarily rich vocabulary and exquisite stylistic features. It's the language of classical Sanskrit drama and the rasa theory is rooted in the structure of this language. Not to mention the extensive linguistic and literary theorizing done on its basis since the 5th century BC. It's as close to perfect as a language can get - in my experience.

I have only heard about this - and I find it great. You know, somepeople take a rich language and systematically turn it into a work of linguistic art, and that over centuries. How cool is that. And it must surely be unique in the history of languages?

Awesome. And it is also written in the (IMHO) most beautiful script ever invented by man. :)

I have only heard about this - and I find it great. You know, somepeople take a rich language and systematically turn it into a work of linguistic art, and that over centuries. How cool is that.

:agree: Studying Sanskrit and attempting to translate from it has been one of the most amazing experiences in my whole life!

And it must surely be unique in the history of languages?

This I don't know about, I have studied 7 languages, and I have gone in depth with only 3 of them (not counting my mother tongue); but Finnish seemed pretty awesome as well, even though I got just a glimpse of it from my 3 months of studying. It has 15 cases and an utterly cool consonant change system with absolutely amazing logic. Phonetics are my weakness :love:

And Bulgarian is the only language in the world to have developed a secondary set of indefinite verb forms.

Anyway, drifting off topic, but what I meant to say is that each langauge has a unique face and usually an amazing consistecy which allows you to actually predict its behaviour in the course of studying it.

Sanskrit is definitely outstanding though, on many levels, and human perfection is definitely one of them. Its standing as a court and lithurgical language svaed it from too much outside influences and dillution, because practically all users were literate, and it was forged exclusively consciously and purposefully.

Awesome. And it is also written in the (IMHO) most beautiful script ever invented by man. :)

I agree! :lol:

Hrm, I went to look at what the site said... I think they must have separate (and misleading) definitions for "official" and "national" languages, or something... Elsewhere on the site, on the Turkish page, they just say that it has "Official regional recognition" and had 845,550 speakers in Bulgaria in 1986 (22 years ago, so quite out-dated). Don't know what's going on with their saying that Old Church Slavonic is a language of Russia, without saying that it was a language of Bulgaria first, though. They did categorize it as being in the same "South Eastern Slavic" branch as Bulgarian. :shrug:

Perhaps they have some internal definition lines of these terms, I really didn't spend much time browsing, just saw that under Bulgaria both languages were listed as official/national (with a slash). But the misconception about Old Church Slavonic, and indeed the cyrillic alphabet, that ascribe them Russian origin, is pretty common, unfortunately.

This I don't know about, I have studied 7 languages, and I have gone in depth with only 3 of them (not counting my mother tongue); but Finnish seemed pretty awesome as well, even though I got just a glimpse of it from my 3 months of studying. It has 15 cases and an utterly cool consonant change system with absolutely amazing logic. Phonetics are my weakness :love:

Mine, too - and Finnish is amazing, now question. Another language I know sort of theoretically, but not properly. <sigh>

There quite a few languages I admire.... ancient Greek is a particular favourite, for its amazing ability to express so many things. Interestingly enough, it is the irregular quirks of that language that make it more expressive, I think - combined with some of the features (to a lesser degree, though) that make Sanskrit so rich - i.e. a very complex system of verb forms, an ability to create new words and turn almost anything into nouns.....



Still.... I think (and I can't know for certain) that Sanskrit has had a lot of work done to it because it was a sacred language slowly drifting away from the actual spoken idiom, but at the same time very vigorously practiced by poets etc.

So, what you get is lots of amazing languages which developed naturally in an interesting way. But Sanskrit was also filed and worked on deliberately - that's why I think of it as part language part intellectual exercise, part work of art. :)

I can't think of another language that has a history of that kind. :)

Mine, too - and Finnish is amazing, now question. Another language I know sort of theoretically, but not properly. <sigh>

Yes, it is, it's truly fascinating, and very preserved, structurally and especially its vocabulary. But I love the morphology most, ebcause it's just soooo perfect!!! Anyway, Finnish has its own thread, AND I only studied it for 3 months, unfortunately.

There quite a few languages I admire.... ancient Greek is a particular favourite, for its amazing ability to express so many things.

I can only envy you there, I know nothing about ancient Greek! Except how to say "I love you" (and I'm not sure it's even correct!)

Still.... I think (and I can't know for certain) that Sanskrit has had a lot of work done to it because it was a sacred language slowly drifting away from the actual spoken idiom, but at the same time very vigorously practiced by poets etc.

Indeed it has. Not only because of its lithurgic use, but also because of the numerous poetry and drama competitions held in the courts in the late classical period, since it was also court and literary language. It was pushed a lot in those adorned plays which are complicated to insanity.

One of the things I love best about India is the ancient Indian fascination with and amazing insight into language and liguistics, especially its philosophical and mystical side. One of the Vedic hymns of creation is dedicated to Vac, the Speech, whcih is how the world started, according to this hymn.

I can't think of another language that has a history of that kind. :)

I know of none, either. (or are you supposed to say "too" in this sentence? help?)

Hm..

Oldest langauge?
It's still a bit of a debate to say that.
(And don't get me started on the Tamil/Sanskrit debate)

Oldest written language is a tossup between Egyptian and Sumerian. (I lean more to Sumer myself)

I forgot there was something else I saw...

From here (http://www.archaeology.org/0803/abstracts/letter.html)
Click pic to enlarge
http://www.archaeology.org/0803/abstracts/thumbnails/letter2.gif (http://www.archaeology.org/0803/abstracts/jpegs/letter2.jpg)
Some archaeologists, including Blombos Cave excavator Christopher Henshilwood of the University of Bergen in Norway, believe this pattern and another on a smaller piece of ocher dated to 75,000 years ago are the earliest evidence of human minds capable of expressing themselves through symbols.
Making symbols implies the ability to speak a language and, says University of Stellenbosch archaeologist Hilary Deacon, that may have been the crucial developmental step that eventually allowed people to establish the vast social and trade networks that distinguish modern societies.

Aham snihyaami Sanskrite :) (I hope I got the Locative case right)



Only the Indo-European languages :)
I'd just like to clarify that while Sanskrit has been an influential language, it is not generally regarded as any kind of source language for all Indo-European languages.

ETA

Well you already acknowledged that I see, but it can't hurt to restate it given the hyperbolic title of the thread. :lol: