About the 'hypothetical' Proto-Indo-European language

Indo-European is most commonly referred to by many – usually non-Indo-European – linguists as the hypothetical common ancestor of the Indo-European languages. Also, people usually refer to other languages or language families without written remains as hypothesis. We could talk, then, about the hypothetical Indo-Uralic, Eurasian, Ural-Altaic, Proto-Pontic or Nostratic languages, for example.

On the other hand, there are some languages, like Minoan – already mentioned in the previous post -, which aren’t officially hypothetical. I guess that’s because we have some written remains (still undeciphered) of a probable language system, supposedly related to Eteocretan, a younger language … Read the rest “About the 'hypothetical' Proto-Indo-European language”

Basque, 'the oldest language'

There are, from time to time, some articles or speeches which address a common misconception hardly related to linguistics, namely that of Basque being ‘the oldest language’.

Firstly, let me say that I (as many others) like the Basque language specially because of its peculiarity: it is one of those strange language isolates that can be found in some corners of the world, having resisted the linguistic battle of those unending cultural wars that contact between different human societies usually generate. In this very case, the language resisted the spread of Indo-European dialects in Western Europe, just as Uralic resisted … Read the rest “Basque, 'the oldest language'”

Brugmann's 'wrong approach' to Proto-Indo-European

I read in some [tag]Slavic[/tag]-oriented personal website, with a tiny section dedicated to Indo-European studies, that [tag]Brugmann[/tag]’s old approach was wrong due to his wrong assumptions about PIE – confusingly enough, he mixes Brugmann’s (late) PIE with an early PIE, in turn related to a hypothetical [tag]Indo-Uralic[/tag] -, and subsequently also every single work published since his Grundriss which didn’t correct those mistakes. In this very case – which is not the only one that can be found out on the Web – the author emphasized the importance of the wrong accusative reconstruction of the German linguist; … Read the rest “Brugmann's 'wrong approach' to Proto-Indo-European”

Happy new Indo-European Year!

We are entering a new year, hopefully The first Indo-European Year.

I have been thinking about where we started, and what I thought exactly a year ago that it was going to happen with our Indo-European revival projects. Even though I usually complain a lot about our lack of resources, I shall say that if the coming years are so good as the last, then the language revival is certainly going to succeed.

I am quite happy now looking at the past, and I am usually very pessimistic. I won’t make an extensive report – we will publish … Read the rest “Happy new Indo-European Year!”

The Paneuropean Movement and the European language

We learnt some time ago about the Paneuropean movement in Europe, founded in 1923 by Count Richard Nikolaus von Coudenhove-Kalergi, and we thought we definitely found what we were looking for: a traditional idea of a single Pan-European State, formed by all European democratic states.

At first, we wanted the International Paneuropean Union to get involved in the promotion of the Indo-European language, but there is no easy way to do that. We are a modern private group, and they are a traditional public association; our proposal is completely new and unknown – to the extent that some people are … Read the rest “The Paneuropean Movement and the European language”

Esperanto vs. Europaio?

I’ve recently read in some forums about Indo-European revival being a “new IAL” with ‘no chances against Esperanto‘.

The objective of Europaio is – and was – never to substitute Esperanto or to undermine the Esperanto, Ido, Interlingua, etc. communities. We are very respectful of the long tradition of IALs in building worldwide communities around international, ‘neutral’ languages, for our society to become more democratic, more jointly liable, or whatever those groups may seek.

However, things should always be clear to everyone when comparing Indo-European with such languages:

Esperanto is an artifcial language invented by one man, as

… Read the rest

Esperanto, Ido, Interlingua,… (2)

I was wondering what could happen if people disagreed with our approaches to Europaio. We have allowed anyone not only to disagree within our frameworks, but also to use our works and names to create their own projects – but for “Dnghu” and “Europaio”, if they completely disagree with our grammar rules. We thought this was the fairest legal position to hold, given that we had to defend our efforts as first-movers in IE revival issues, at the same time guaranteeing everybody the right to create a better project, as nobody should be able to retain rights over the Indo-European … Read the rest “Esperanto, Ido, Interlingua,… (2)”

Perfection in Esperanto, Ido, Interlingua,…

When someone has learnt natural languages different from his or her mother tongue, invented languages appear always to be imperfect when compared to them, as contradictory as it may sound, given that perfection is what their creators try to achieve.

I’ve tried to learn Esperanto at least three times, and always left the grammar or learning method in the first lessons. Its aim of being the world’s only IAL, and its great community of supporters appealed to me. But, the aura of perfection – ‘no irregularities’, ‘perfect corresponding alphabet’, ‘culturally neutral’ ‘mixed vocabulary’,… – that many people try (wrongly) to … Read the rest “Perfection in Esperanto, Ido, Interlingua,…”

Why not adopt a single official language for the European Union?

How would the EU justify not adopting European as its official language? The ~~multilingual~~ European Day of Languages (2001) ~~cultural~~ political issue (of learning to speak at least two foreign languages) is being accepted more and more as a central EU policy, despite its little success in defending Europe’s diversity – as the languages learnt are the two or three more supported by the EU. Following the linguistic FAQ of the official EU website,

1. “[We do not adopt a single official language for the EU] Because it would cut off most people in the EU from an … Read the rest “Why not adopt a single official language for the European Union?”