Where does Sanskrit come from?

[Kirran]

I know we have a few members on here who oppose the Aryan migration theory. The opposing arguments make no sense to me at all, but I guess the inverse is probably also true.

So, for anybody who is up for discussing it, I have a question: How did Sanskrit, an Indo-European language, as well as all the other Indo-European languages found currently and historically in India, come to be spoken there so widely, if not through the migration of Indo-European-speaking peoples into the land and their admixture with the native peoples?

I look forward to any debate ensuing.

 

[Ingledsva]

Read THE WHITE GODDESS, by Robert Graves.

He talks about all kinds of very early mixing, of people, language, and gods.

*

 

[Treks]

Sadly, The White Goddess is not of much scholarly value anymore. The White Goddess - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

How did Sanskrit, an Indo-European language, as well as all the other Indo-European languages found currently and historically in India, come to be spoken there so widely, if not through the migration of Indo-European-speaking peoples into the land and their admixture with the native peoples?

Sanskrit became widely spoken in India for similar reasons that Latin was spoken throughout the Western Roman Empire, and Greek through the Eastern Roman Empire, and Germanic languages among Germanic tribes, and English in the USA. Generally, given any region, there tends to be at least one language spoken (and by generally I mean always), and writing tends to both cement a language and increase speakers- particularly if religious texts (written or oral) are in that language (like the Vedas).
Also, the major languages that have been and continue to be spoke in India are members of the Indo-Aryan languages (a sub-branch of the Indo-European languages), such as Persian (a language that was widely spoken because the Persian empire was one of the largest empires in history). And the Dravidian languages (which aren't Indo-Aryan or Indo-European) are spoken across large regions of India:

This is kind of like asking why Latin, Arabic, or Greek became so widely spoken (except these were more widely spoken, and arguably over longer periods of time). Or, for those not familiar with historical/comparative linguistics, IE linguistics, etc., it's like asking how the Roman alphabet became so widely used or why Greek geometry and Arabic algebra became so popular. It's as if you think there is something mysterious about this, but for the life of me I can't figure out what.

 

[Kirran]

I'll google the White Goddess!

Legion, thanks for your in-depth response. I don't think there's anything mysterious at all, I think I've a pretty good idea of how these processes work. What I'm raising the point for is as a talking point with those who disagree with the Aryan migration theory, who generally claim that there have been no migrations of Indo-Europeans into India.

Such claims are often associated with beliefs that Sanskrit originated in India, and that all Indian languages, including Dravidian ones, descend from Sanskrit.

 

[spiritualhitchhiker]

nevermind.

 

[spiritualhitchhiker]

I'll google the White Goddess!

Legion, thanks for your in-depth response. I don't think there's anything mysterious at all, I think I've a pretty good idea of how these processes work. What I'm raising the point for is as a talking point with those who disagree with the Aryan migration theory, who generally claim that there have been no migrations of Indo-Europeans into India.

Such claims are often associated with beliefs that Sanskrit originated in India, and that all Indian languages, including Dravidian ones, descend from Sanskrit.

What reasons do you have to believe otherwise?

Sanskrit is Hindus, do you find any traces of Sanskrit in Europe or whatever imaginary place you claim these imaginary Aryans came from?

 

[Kirran]

Sanskrit was taught by the Devas to Humans.

Then why does it have so many similarities to Persian, Greek, Italian, etc?

 

[spiritualhitchhiker]

Then why does it have so many similarities to Persian, Greek, Italian, etc?

Ask the Devas.

 

[Kirran]

What reasons do you have to believe otherwise?

Sanskrit is Hindus, do you find any traces of Sanskrit in Europe or whatever imaginary place you claim these imaginary Aryans came from?

Not of Sanskrit. But we find it fits absolutely into the Indo-European family tree. Linguistic evidence all shows Sanskrit comes from outside India, ultimately.

 

[spiritualhitchhiker]

Not of Sanskrit. But we find it fits absolutely into the Indo-European family tree. Linguistic evidence all shows Sanskrit comes from outside India, ultimately.

Just because it fits doesn't mean it is.

Doesn't it stand to reason if there are no traces of Sanskrit outside India, then it couldn't have come from outside. That linguistic evidence could have been fabricated by the barbarians and savages to appropriate something refined and sophisticated.

There was one other talk by this Rajiv Malhotra on Aryans myth, I'll post it when I find it.

 

[Kirran]

Just because it fits doesn't mean it is.

Doesn't it stand to reason if there are no traces of Sanskrit outside India, then it couldn't have come from outside. That linguistic evidence could have been fabricated?

There was one other talk by this Rajiv Malhotra on Aryans myth, I'll post it when I find it.

English descends from languages from modern-day Germany and the Netherlands. But there is no English to be found there, and no historical traces of English.

What we do find there are languages sharing a lot of similarities with English. The further back in time we go, we see more similarities. Old English is very similar to contemporary German dialects. The same logic applies in India. Sanskrit is very similar to Old Persian.

Mainstream scholarship has soundly rejected the Indigenous Aryans theory as nationalistic pseudoscience. As heirs to an ancient culture of science and learning, surely we shouldn't reject historical evidence for emotional reasons

 

[spiritualhitchhiker]

English descends from languages from modern-day Germany and the Netherlands. But there is no English to be found there, and no historical traces of English.

What we do find there are languages sharing a lot of Similarities

But German is still found in Germany, right?

 

[Desert Snake]

Just because it fits doesn't mean it is.

Doesn't it stand to reason if there are no traces of Sanskrit outside India, then it couldn't have come from outside. That linguistic evidence could have been fabricated by the barbarians and savages to appropriate something refined and sophisticated.

I think you are on the wrong track, here. There is clearly linguistic similarities between Sanskrit and other languages. No falsifying of things necessary.

 

[Kirran]

But German is still found in Germany, right?

I posted my post too soon by accident, and have now finished it by edit. Apologies.

Yes, one finds German in Germany. And Persian in Iran.

 

[spiritualhitchhiker]

Mainstream scholarship has soundly rejected the Indigenous Aryans theory as nationalistic pseudoscience. As heirs to an ancient culture of science and learning, surely we shouldn't reject historical evidence for emotional reasons

The mainstream scholarship has an agenda. Why are there no traces of Sanskrit in Europe? I mean there should be at least something at the place of it's origin.

I think you are on the wrong track, here. There is clearly linguistic similarities between Sanskrit and other languages. No falsifying of things necessary.

Where have I denied the similarities?

 

[Kirran]

The mainstream scholarship has an agenda. Why are there no traces of Sanskrit in Europe? I mean there should be at least something at the place of it's origin.

Sanskrit being of Indo-European origin doesn't require its presence in Europe. Anymore than French sharing a common ancestor with Romanian doesn't require its presence in Romania.

 

[spiritualhitchhiker]

I posted my post too soon by accident, and have now finished it by edit. Apologies.

Yes, one finds German in Germany. And Persian in Iran.

Let's say German is Sanskrit, English is Indo-European languages.

If English descended from German, and there are no traces of English in Germany(originating country), English has similarities with German same way Indo-European languages have similarities with Sanskrit, does that mean English speaking people migrated to Germany? Does that make sense to you?

 

[psychoslice]

I don't know where it came from, but someone had to make it up.

 

[Kirran]

Let's say German is Sanskrit, English is Indo-European languages.

If English descended from German, and there are no traces of English in Germany(originating country), English has similarities with German same way Indo-European languages have similarities with Sanskrit, does that mean English speaking people migrated to Germany? Does that make sense to you?

I have not been clear it seems. The claim is not that Sanskrit in the form we know it was itself brought into India. But that a language ancestral to it was brought to India, and subsequently developed into Rigvedic Sanskrit, then Classical Sanskrit, and eventually the Prakrits and the modern languages like Hindi, Bengali and Nepali.

Same as how speakers of Old Saxon and Old Anglic migrated to Britain, and their language developed into Old English, which creolised with Norman French to produce Middle English, which became Modern English.