You must log in or register to comment.

thepriceofaslave t1_iv6fkhu wrote

I thought Basque wasn't Indo-European?


BLAZENIOSZ OP t1_iv6hhp6 wrote

It's not, the basque region believe it or not, is majority Spanish Speaker.


thepriceofaslave t1_iv6ry1r wrote

Aw that's a pity. It is a really unusual linguistic anomaly in Europe


Volcic-tentacles t1_iv9bse3 wrote

It's not an "anomaly". Languages were much more varied before the ear of European imperialism and colonialism. The Europeans murdered so many people across the globe that vast numbers of languages were simply lost.

Language isolates are much more common than you think.


MannAusSachsen t1_iv9ipiq wrote

Calm down down, they are right. It is a really unusual linguistic anomaly in Europe. As in: Languages spoken in Europe today dominantly derive from the indo-european language family.


Volcic-tentacles t1_iv9k30h wrote

Basque is a language isolate, though some speculate that it is related to Caucasian languages, there is no consensus. But it's not an "anomaly" at all. This would suggest that it is unexpected. It is not unexpected: Basques have been living in that part of the world, speaking that language for as long as we have records. Nothing anomalous about them.

As a linguist I can tell you that language isolates are common across the globe, largely because of the damage wrought by European imperialism - they didn't just murder people, they murdered languages.

Worse, in London alone you can hear over 200 languages being spoken today. So your view of Europe and languages spoken in Europe is about an uninformed as it could be and obviously rooted in unexamined imperialist and colonialist attitudes.

You should go back to commenting on cat videos.


MannAusSachsen t1_iv9kkyr wrote

Fine, an isolate then. Why didn't it suffice to make this distinction with three sentences, instead you had to derail in a condescending manner?


robert1005 t1_iv9lss3 wrote

Name me some other examples of languages in Europe like the euskara then. Name me examples in Europe of languages that go back millenia that have stayed relatively isolated and became their own language group. Because that was the original topic in this comment threat.


ElJanitorFrank t1_iv9sg6q wrote

You're a rude self-righteous preachy person. You've effectively squashed that person's interest in this subject, which I'm assuming you're invested in as a self titled linguist.

How terrible that London is so diverse that more languages are spoken there than anyone can even name. Get off your high horse and treat people with respect, dick.


Aprokind t1_iv9xayf wrote

As a non linguist, you are kinda annoying and condescending. Sneed.


argwiththem t1_ivamr9u wrote

Then you shouldn't use any other colors for the Russian Federeation. There is no region except probably Caucasus where the majority speaks on aboriginal for the territory language. For example, the Resp. Bashkortostan are colored brown, but Bashkir language are currently used by only 1.4 million people in the world while the whole population of the Resp. is 4 million people.


magnesiumb t1_iv7efwe wrote

Why are there two Oranges?? Hard to tell them apart, they look the same, if they are different.

I don’t this this is very detailed. Seems like a high level overview. Many of these countries are teeming with linguistic diversity.


BLAZENIOSZ OP t1_iv7ekmw wrote

Ye I kinda ran out of colors, but it's not the complete same, also one of them says South Indian.


magnesiumb t1_iv7ewwg wrote

Yeah, I can see where the break is but it was just confusing at first glance to see South India lumped in with the other ones in Orange. That was new info to me, lol. It makes sense but even a darker orange would have worked.


Newton_101 t1_ivaocmv wrote

most of south indian languages’ origin also has roots in Sanskrit. Where would you put sanskrit in? Indo-european?


jakubkonecki t1_iv6g5ai wrote

What do you mean by 'detailed'?


Vilko3259 t1_iv6gz08 wrote

higher granularity than just country-level.


BLAZENIOSZ OP t1_iv6gzmg wrote

I saw a previous map that only did language family by country, I thought there was a lot more to it, and countries by themselves have regions with different languages. So I decided to go on further and do it by subdivision, giving it more detail.


Puncius_Pinatus t1_iv7wp9s wrote

How much time did you spent on europe? As i know, there are some regions around hungary that mayorly hungarian speaking.

We sometimes say "hungary is the only country which is surrounded by itself".


L0SC0L t1_iv8dp98 wrote

interesting, what parts, i guess serbia and romania, karpaty?


_javocado t1_iv6m6a5 wrote

I get that Japanese could isolate from other languages but isn’t it interesting that Korean did the same while not being on an island?


RedmondBarry1999 t1_iv8kg8b wrote

Technically Japanese isn't an isolate: it is part of the Japonic family along with the Ryukyuan languages.

EDIT: Korean is also related to the Jeju language, although the latter is severely endangered.


RoamingArchitect t1_iv9z2cb wrote

Honestly I am not convinced the two aren't somehow related. Learning Korean it felt as though a quarter was basically Japanese words with weird pronunciation shifts and another quarter was Chinese in origin. I do get that both languages would have loanwords but for me the overlap felt a bit too intensive to both languages. Almost like a weird puzzle piece linking them.

There are theories that Japanese and Korean might be related but you'll get plenty of deniers on both sides (understandable considering their history) and it seems to be on that cusp where language studies either sides with loan-words and cross-pollination or with interrelatedness. That being said I do think that the Altaic language theory doesn't hold up. Just because there is an overlap from Japanese to Korean and than a questionable one to the Mongolic languages and so on until you land in the Turkic languages is not proof that they are all related. The same logic could be applied to Jp-Kor-Chn and then into Burmese. But Korean as a link barely works in this case and beyond the odd Chinese loanword you'll be hard pressed to find any relationship between Burmese and Japanese as opposite ends of the chain if you will.


Rraudfroud t1_iv79hn3 wrote

What’s happening in the UAE is it a age old farsi community or recent indian migrants


BLAZENIOSZ OP t1_iv6clne wrote

Sources: Goign through each Nations demogrphics sections and using previous language maps of the world.

Example.: when I wanted to find the majority language of Nunavut I look at the Wikipedia article for its demographics. The majority of native language is indigenous. Inuit language. And so many more Wikipedia articles, too many too include



leibnizpascal t1_iv6jlgd wrote

Can someone shed some knowledge on how language groups are identified.


ferrel_hadley t1_iv6nsa5 wrote

Similarities in words especially root words and grammar structures. Especially when you have more ancient forms preserved as for Latin, Greek and Sanskrit that was used to tease the first scientific theories of language groups.


leibnizpascal t1_iv6p4z3 wrote

Ohh I see, but being a native Hindi(said to be indo Europe) speaker I am pretty sure i won't understand even a word from german(Was making my way through learning Russian but hardly found any word that was close to its Hindi counterparts).

Whereas if i listen to kannada, which is a South Indian language (which is shown as Dravidian language)....i can pick words here and there.


artaig t1_iv7jwwc wrote

Yes you will, if you are trained. The idea of grouping languages came exactly because of English and Germans encountering Sanskrit and Hindi and figuring out they were related. Name-Naam, Mutter-Maata, Vater-Pita,...

Even Western Classical languages:

Maharani = mega regina


ferrel_hadley t1_iv6qg8o wrote

People often do not understand other dialects of their own language.

In terms of individual words, languages will often take loan words from other languages, so for example Turkish has a lot of Persian words as the ruling class used to speak Persian. Or English is something like 1/3 loan words from French due to the ruling class speaking it. But if you go to pre Norman English (Anglo Saxon) it is much closer to early forms of Dutch (Friesian).

This is why when you have ancient forms of languages you can see more clearly the connections.

Also with Indo European the languages likely started to split about 6000 years ago when the various people migrated east towards India and Iran and west into Europe. So there is a huge amount of time for the languages to diverge. The similarities are in the shortest and oldest words, words for things like father, mother that kind of thing.


thermidorthelobster t1_iv9j4go wrote

That makes sense. My native language is English and I speak a bit of German, but I can understand written modern Dutch a lot better than Medieval English.


DurgaThangai69 t1_iv93a3i wrote

That's mostly because kannnada has taken loaned some words from Hindi


vacri t1_iv9j68w wrote

Check out this infographic for a more visceral sense of the family. The word for 'two' is similar across most of the indo-european family. Obviously not all words are like this, but it's an interesting graphic.

Another example of how a family is related but not mutually intelligible is that the English "black" and the French "blanc" ('white') come from the same origin - an older word referring to stuff left over after a fire. The English branch took this to mean charcoal, and the French branch took this to mean ash.


ofufnfighskfj t1_ivd4tz0 wrote

Doesn’t it make more sense that French “blanc” is related to English “blank” not “black”


vacri t1_ivdxvit wrote

Blank is a later 'forking' of the word, coming to English via French.


azaghal1988 t1_iv9dv1x wrote

It's similarities in very "basic" words for something as far removed as Hindi and German.

Things like family relations are often only a few sound-changes removed P<>V (sound like F) i <> a

Vater (Father) vs. Pita

even with only the change of i<>a you're very close to the latin "pater".


There are other things, like the indian word "Raj" being very similar to it's latin translation "Rex".


polite-pagan t1_iv9fzvm wrote

If you are really a native Hindi speaker, then the words you might understand in Kannada are all Sanskrit loanwords in Kannada.


leibnizpascal t1_ivawom5 wrote

Yeah while most are there are words which are like extensions or short form of certain Hindi or north Indian language words.


geaddaddy t1_ivau609 wrote

Here is an example. I think that there is a dance called the saptapadi, is that right? Done at marriages, and meaning seven steps.

In Latin the root septa means seven and pedes literally means feet but the root is used in lots of words to refer to walking or stepping.


leibnizpascal t1_ivawgcx wrote

Yeah while that's true, the Malayalam(which is yet another Dravidian language) for steps is "padikal"(which also seems to come from the same word padi).

Honestly I am still not convinced with this whole language grouping. Maybe i have to read into the links that people in other comments have shared.


Nafetz1600 t1_iv6v30s wrote

Correct me if I'm wrong: The Sounds that the languages use should be similar so you can write a the sound of a german word in Hindi.


LanchestersLaw t1_iv9de2l wrote

A lot of research went into trying to define language families. It is a very interesting topic to read about.

The TL;DR version is that languages evolve in predictable ways. You can reverse engineer what a parent language would sound like by comparing its daughter languages. This is very similar to cladistic analysis in evolutionary biology. By comparing traits of organisms it is possible to reverse engineer how they evolved.

Like most scientific hypotheses the evidence for language families was pretty flimsy at first, but it had accumulated over time and is supported by archeological finds, and DNA analysis. All languages should have a common ancestor language far enough back, in the same way all organisms have a common ancestor. Unlike organisms, language does not have fossils and the language groups shown here are basically as far back as we are able to show similarities to languages.

India is one of the most interesting countries in the world linguistically because it has multiple language families. Because children tend to speak their parent’s language, the language families correspond to human migrations. The Dravidian speakers of South India used to be more wide-spread in India before proto-indo-europeans orginating from central asia displaced them. This is an incredibly interesting topic to read about.


astro_nova t1_ivd2xtg wrote

It’s western oriented. But basically it’s historical plus linguistic. But this is by no means settled science and in the past leading theories or sidelined (especially non-western) ideas rose to prominence and consensus or were cast aside, and disagreement still exists.


Chris-1235 t1_iv8qiae wrote

Ah yes, the famous Greek-speaking Emperor penguins . I heard there's a tribe that speaks Latin too, but never with foreigners.


[deleted] t1_iv6jdvw wrote



Hotel777 t1_iv8a19c wrote

Paraguayan here, you're right, no idea why you're getting downvoted

OP is saying 95% speak guarani but that couldn't be farther from the truth.

Around ~90% UNDERSTAND the language and the majority do SPEAK it but it's nowhere near +90% levels.

Also apart from Guarani, people also speak Spanish...

I also highly doubt Inuit languages are classified as being part of the same FAMILY group as Tupi Guarani and others


BLAZENIOSZ OP t1_iv6jg2a wrote

95% Guarani.


authorPGAusten t1_iv6zkco wrote

Not sure how you are doing the classification, but 95% speak Guarani, but also 95+% speak Spanish. Most people are dual lingual, but I think more people speak Spanish natively, or at least similar rates.... not sure how it would be on this map


Hotel777 t1_iv8a3se wrote

Yeah.. but those 95% also speak Spanish..?


No_Broccoli_56 t1_iv8q4y2 wrote

why is the northern tip of tunisia grey?


Longjumping-Ad-2333 t1_iv8vtt3 wrote

Native Australians: “Am I a joke to you?”


vacri t1_iv9jewb wrote

Who comprise 3% of the population, and who pretty much all speak English as well. There is the rare person who doesn't speak English, but the overwhelming majority do.


Longjumping-Ad-2333 t1_iv9ki17 wrote

Sure, but a map that shows linguistic migration patterns is showing a very recent one.


54ltymuch t1_iv9egaj wrote

UAE Indo-European thanks to all the people of Indian origin there lmaoo


zelonhusk t1_iv9iab5 wrote

Dravidian and Afto-Asiatic are supposed to be different kinds of orange, right?


Carumba t1_iv9lstp wrote

How is Khovsgol province of Mongolia is Indo-European??


-limit-breaker- t1_iv9r7r7 wrote

Lol @ "indigenous American" ... did we just get too tired to differentiate between Athabaskan, Eskaleut, Quechua, etc.? I get they're not as widely spoken or known as Indo European or Turkic but come on, mate. This isn't "detailed" 🙄


208bilionsthxandbb t1_iv9sebg wrote

So this is only majority national languages? Taken this way, it sure looks way more homogeneous than it really is


TheCasualParry t1_iv7cqot wrote

Quechua is spoken by about 500 thousand people in Argentina. 1400 thousand people live in Tucumán, 700 thousand in Jujuy.

There is a significant amount of quechua speakers in those provinces, but I highly doubt it surpasses 50% of the total population.


BLAZENIOSZ OP t1_iv7cw4y wrote

That area is a bit complicated I may have accidently colored the wrong province.


TheCasualParry t1_iv7d67s wrote

Don't worry about it. The only other province that I think could possibly surpass 50% is Santiago del Estero. I'll leave the details to you 👍


revengeOfTheSquirrel t1_iv98387 wrote

As a colorblind person, it is hell to identify the colors from the tiny squares on the left. Nice nap though.


wody21 t1_iv9hexs wrote

What's up with the grey category? E.g. Northern part of Tunisia, border of Iran / Turkmenistan and so on...?


RussianCatsSayWeaw t1_iv9hfxj wrote

Good at first look but the details are fucking bullshits


b1ue_jellybean t1_iv9lmae wrote

Is this official languages of countries or majority spoken languages of countries, since NZ only has te reo and sign as official languages.


Datapunkt t1_iv6jhzh wrote

Wow, I didn't know Austria has even influenced Asian languages.


ferrel_hadley t1_iv6n2vo wrote

Hungary, Finno Urgic thought to be from near the Urals. They were one of many nomadic peoples from the central Asian steppes (though often they were from the European parts as well) who swept through Europe and they were one of the few to leave a lasting kingdom and language that survived to the modern world.


Datapunkt t1_iv74xha wrote

Was meant to be a joke regarding austroasian since many things starting with "austro" refer to Austria.


macklowe t1_iv95hqj wrote

Inner Mongolia is vast majority Sino-Tibetan today.


Volcic-tentacles t1_iv9bu02 wrote

Detailed map of European Imperialism more like.


dazaroo2 t1_iv9hprr wrote

Bro came to this thread with an agenda and he ain't stopping


TheCatInTheHatThings t1_iv9lx3u wrote

I mean…you could at least have distinguished between Germanic and Romance languages… that’s a pretty big difference that’s not being acknowledged right there.


geaddaddy t1_ivbppqa wrote

It is by language families. It is no bigger than the spread in any of the other large families


vk6flab t1_iv6rzno wrote

I'm pretty sure that none of the first nations people in Australia would characterise their language as Indo-European.

Depending on how you count, there are between 250 and 363 different languages like that in Australia.



BLAZENIOSZ OP t1_iv6wfk4 wrote

They don't constitue enough of the population to make a difference.


vk6flab t1_iv6wqyi wrote

The title of your visualisation is "Detailed Language...", not "Primary Language...".