atre324 t1_j0siy68 wrote
Just curious… For Sanskrit learners/speakers- does knowing any other language help you learn Sanskrit? Are there similar words/grammar with other languages?
biriyani_lover t1_j0sopnf wrote
Lotta indian languages have their roots in Sanskrit and thus share a common vocab and some rules
kittylkitty t1_j0t7u70 wrote
Thai / Laos / Burmese too
Fiyanggu t1_j0tjtoy wrote
Their written script is based off of Sanskrit, but those languages themselves don't derive from Sanskrit.
[deleted] t1_j0tr5x0 wrote
[deleted]
Terpomo11 t1_j0tn77r wrote
What do you mean by saying their written script is based on Sanskrit?
KhyberPass49 t1_j0tocnb wrote
Like Mongolian is written in Cyrillic but is not related to any Slavic language
kindred_asura t1_j0tqant wrote
never heard of that, that's crazy.
Iwantmyflag t1_j0tsf9v wrote
More like pretty common. The Alphabet you are using right now was originally developed for Phoenician, a Semitic language, adapted by the Greeks for Greek, not related. Also adapted to Etruscan, not related. From there adapted to Latin, not related to either of those and then once more to English, which is related to Latin but not that closely. Cyrillic is an adaptation of the Greek variant for Slavic languages and of course also not related to Phoenician.
And let's not even talk about cuneiform.
Vaelos t1_j0u40rv wrote
What about cuneiform? 🤔
JimiThing716 t1_j0u9rv1 wrote
He said let's not even talk about it. /s
SaiyaJedi t1_j0uihdn wrote
It was later adopted by the Akkadians, whose language was not related to Sumerian.
Iwantmyflag t1_j0wzug6 wrote
That's only the beginning. Over about 3000 years Sumerian cuneiform was used (at least) by the Sumerians of course, a language not related to any other as far as we can tell. Then Akkadian, Babylonian, Assyrian, those 3 are semitic languages.
Also used for Elamite, another contemporary language not related to anything.
Hittite, an indoeuropean language. Again completely different from all the others.
Urartian, which I can't recall right now what it is related to but it's not semitic
and finally, heavily adapted, Old Persian, another indoeuropean language.
And it's not trivial to just use Cuneiform for a different language as the "letters" don't fit the sounds. For example it's a pain to map cuneiform symbols to Hittite sounds and uncertainties remain in transcribing and translating the texts.
What's more, we can only read, translate and even to an extent speak those millenia old languages because the writing was used so long and was still used for languages where we have modern descendants and/or texts in different scripts and alphabets like the Rosetta stone or the Darius inscriptions.
[deleted] t1_j0x3aam wrote
[deleted]
crostrom t1_j0ujnv8 wrote
This is reading like a Monty Python skit
Iwantmyflag t1_j0x37ef wrote
Over about 3000 years Sumerian cuneiform was used (at least)
-
by the Sumerians of course, a language not related to any other as far as we can tell.
-
Then Akkadian, Babylonian, Assyrian, those 3 are semitic languages.
-
Also used for Elamite, another contemporary language not related to anything.
Hittite, an indoeuropean language. Again completely different from all the others.
Urartian, which I can't recall right now what it is related to but it's not semitic
and finally, heavily adapted, Old Persian, another indoeuropean language.
Also Eblaite, Hurrian, Luwian which are related to the ones already mentioned and a few more where we have very little texts remaining.
Allidoischill420 t1_j0uqnxb wrote
How do you gain knowledge on language like you have
Iwantmyflag t1_j0wwnio wrote
Well...you start with Latin and ancient Greek in school, then you study linguistics and history with a focus on old languages. And you keep reading and reading whenever you come across something you don't understand. It also helps to be curious.
There's probably easier ways today like just reading Wikipedia. Not everyone has to suffer through deciphering Hittite cuneiform ;)
Terpomo11 t1_j0ttnm9 wrote
But Sanskrit is a language, not a writing system. It can be written in multiple writing systems.
Emotional-Top-8284 t1_j0tai5e wrote
I do not believe that these languages are descended from Sanskrit, though they may share vocabulary. Sanskrit is an indo-European language, and Thai/Laos /Burmese are not.
BBFA369 t1_j0tyfm7 wrote
They likely are - the whole region was heavily influenced by Hindu / Buddhist cultures. further south, Malay has a lot of lingual overlaps with Sanskrit for instance
McDodley t1_j0uhswz wrote
Not sure exactly what you mean, but you may be mistaking cultural influence for linear descent. Malay, Thai, Lao, Burmese are members of three different language families: Austronesian (Malay), Tai-Kadai (Thai, Lao) and Sino-Tibetan (Burmese). Sanskrit is a member of an entirely different one (Indo-European). There is a lot of borrowed vocabulary from Sanskrit in Malay, Thai, Lao and Burmese, but their grammars all work extremely differently from Sanskrit.
BBFA369 t1_j0vvk4q wrote
Ah I think you’re right. I don’t speak those languages so I have no idea how their grammar works but it’s really fascinating that you can borrow vocab between languages that way.
TIL, thanks for sharing!
Background-Throat-88 t1_j0t5qp9 wrote
Hindi helps a lot in learning sanskrit. They have almost same grammar
theshredder744 t1_j0tdkaj wrote
Yep. If I'm not mistaken Hindi is the closest related language.
Source: All my North Indian friends had no trouble learning it in school, but as a South Indian I barely passed the class 😭
Terpomo11 t1_j0tnbml wrote
I would be surprised if it's the closest living language to Sanskrit. Usually the most conservative language varieties are ones spoken in relatively out-of-the-way locations and not the widely-spread lingua francas. Like, say, Lithuanian or Icelandic. That said, it's still much closer to Sanskrit than any Dravidian language.
AdventurousEarth533 t1_j0ubtq1 wrote
Maybe counter point - I speak Kannada (fluent), Hindi (fluent) and Sanskrit (not fluent). From my experience it depends on which flavour of Hindi you speak. For example, Hindi in (purely for the sake of an example), let’s say Hyderabad, is pretty much Urdu. In that case, my Kannada has a higher overlap with Sanskrit. Hindi is not uniform. It has a lot of regional nuances. Perhaps in certain regions Hindi is closer to Sanskrit, but I’m going to say Kannada (other than the written script) is a heck of a lot closer to Sanskrit than many people realise.
Shay_throwaway t1_j0uhtg8 wrote
Can confirm, I'm a native Kannada speaker (aren't we all lol?) and I honestly had an easier time taking Sanskrit classes as a kid than Hindi classes.
Terpomo11 t1_j0wgq6g wrote
Doesn't most of Hindi's core vocabulary descend from Sanskrit? Or are the sound changes enough to obscure it?
PenPineappleAppleInk t1_j0udpcx wrote
A slight counterpoint to this, I speak Telugu which is also a South Indian language but has more Sanskrit influence. I've found that Sanskrit words are more commonly used in everyday language in Telugu than in Hindi. Hindi does use Sanskrit words as well, but while commonly speaking, we often resort to Pali/Prakrit or Urdu words.
I've also noticed something similar with Marathi. Of course, I grew up in Mumbai so my Hindi wasn't as "pure" as the one spoken in North India.
theshredder744 t1_j0uz55a wrote
That's interesting. Admittedly, I'm not knowledgeable enough to tell the difference between Sanskrit, Prakrit, and Urdu words in conversations.
But I completely agree about how many Sanskrit words are used in Telugu, Kannada, and even Malayalam to an extent. It's always interesting how some words and phrases are the same across borders.
[deleted] t1_j0th87f wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j0tfi5u wrote
[removed]
BmoreLax t1_j0t15cn wrote
freddy_guy t1_j0tfmh6 wrote
Lithuanian is a very conservative language in terms of the changes that have occurred in it in the many centuries since it diverged from PIE.
This means that to someone who speaks, say, English, learning Lithuanian is just as difficult as learning Sanskrit. So while it's useful in some sense, in that if you already speak Lithuanian it will be somewhat easier for you to learn Sanskrit, it's not like you should learn Lithuanian in order to better learn Sanskrit.
Plus, the similarities between Sanskrit and Lithuanian tend to be somewhat overstated by non-linguists.
Pinkletskillz t1_j0ti3u4 wrote
I am taking classes in Sanskrit at the moment, and knowing Latin and Ancient Greek (as well as some other PIE languages) is really helping me understand much of the grammar. Those languages as well as Indonesian have been useful for vocabulary too, although you sometimes do need to get into the historical linguistics if you want to recognize the similarities. Above all, it's really a lot of fun studying other languages and seeing the interrelatedness and possibilities of each of them :)
Yugan-Dali t1_j0tmims wrote
Isn’t Indonesian an Austronesian language?
Pinkletskillz t1_j0tn7yl wrote
It is, but the vocabulary was influenced by a lot of other languages such as Sanskrit, Dutch, Arabic, Portuguese and English. It's a very interesting mix :)
Yugan-Dali t1_j0tpyid wrote
I see, thanks
Terpomo11 t1_j0tnck9 wrote
Yes, but it has a lot of Sanskrit loanwords.
Iwantmyflag t1_j0ts0if wrote
Latin or ancient Greek help as they train analysing sentences. But there is no point in learning those first and then Sanskrit.
HillbillyJimbo88 t1_j0ufux2 wrote
To be honest, I have found learning Webdings has been the biggest help in learning Sanskrit.
Weary-Independent991 t1_j0uq6yo wrote
It's the other way round. Learn Sanskrit and you can understand a little bit of this and that
CalEPygous t1_j0v0gfl wrote
Supposedly Latvian and Lithuanian are the closest living, spoken, languages to Sanskrit. This likely reflects the fact that Sanskrit being that it is not spoken doesn't evolve and Lithuanian and Latvian have changed the least among living Indo-European languages.
https://www.reddit.com/r/linguistics/comments/aqjegs/connections_between_lithuanian_sanskrit/
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments