Jump to content

Indo-European studies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected fromIndo-Europeanist)

Part ofa serieson
Indo-European topics
Languages
Extant
Extinct
Reconstructed
Hypothetical
Grammar
Other
Philology
Origins
Mainstream
Alternative and fringe
Archaeology
Chalcolithic (Copper Age)

Pontic Steppe

Caucasus

East Asia

Eastern Europe

Northern Europe

Bronze Age

Pontic Steppe

Northern/Eastern Steppe

Europe

South Asia

Iron Age

Steppe

Europe

Caucasus

India

Peoples and societies
Bronze Age
Iron Age

Indo-Aryans

Iranians

East Asia

Europe

Middle Ages

East Asia

Europe

Indo-Aryan

Iranian

Religion and mythology
Reconstructed
Historical

Indo-Aryan

Iranian

Others

European

Practices
Indo-European studies
Scholars
Institutes
Publications

Indo-European studies(German:Indogermanistik) is a field oflinguisticsand an interdisciplinary field of study dealing withIndo-European languages,both current and extinct.[1]The goal of those engaged in these studies is to amass information about the hypotheticalproto-languagefrom which all of these languages are descended, a language dubbedProto-Indo-European(PIE), and its speakers, theProto-Indo-Europeans,including theirsocietyandProto-Indo-European mythology.The studies cover where the language originated and how it spread. This article also lists Indo-European scholars, centres, journals and book series.

Naming

[edit]

The termIndo-Europeanitself now current in English literature, was coined in 1813 by the British scholar SirThomas Young,although at that time, there was no consensus as to the naming of the recently discovered language family. However, he seems to have used it as a geographical term, to indicate the newly proposed language family inEurasiaspanning from theIndian subcontinenttill theEuropean continent.Among the other names suggested were:

Rask'sjapetiskor "Japhetic languages", after the old notion of "Japhetites"and ultimatelyJapheth,son of the BiblicalNoah,parallels the termSemitic,from Noah's sonShem,andHamitic,from Noah's sonHam.Japhetic and Hamitic are both obsolete, apart from occasional dated use of term "Hamito-Semitic" for theAfro-Asiatic languages.

In English,Indo-Germanwas used by J. C. Prichard in 1826 although he preferredIndo-European.In French, use ofindo-européenwas established by A. Pictet (1836). In German literature,Indoeuropäischwas used byFranz Boppsince 1835, while the termIndogermanischhad already been introduced byJulius von Klapprothin 1823, intending to include the northernmost and the southernmost of the family's branches, as it were as an abbreviation of the full listing of involved languages that had been common in earlier literature.Indo-Germanischbecame established by the works ofAugust Friedrich Pott,who understood it to include the easternmost and the westernmost branches, opening the doors to ensuing fruitless discussions whether it should not beIndo-Celtic,or evenTocharo-Celtic.

Today,Indo-European,indo-européenis well established in English and French literature, whileIndogermanischremains current in German literature, but alongside a growing number of uses ofIndoeuropäisch.Similarly,Indo-Europeeshas now largely replaced the still occasionally encounteredIndogermaansin Dutch scientific literature.

Indo-Hittiteis sometimes used for the wider family including Anatolian by those who consider that IE and Anatolian are comparable separate branches.

Study methods

[edit]

Thecomparative methodwas formally developed in the 19th century and applied first to Indo-European languages. The existence of the Proto-Indo-Europeans had been inferred bycomparative linguisticsas early as 1640, while attempts at an Indo-European proto-language reconstruction date back as far as 1713. However, by the 19th century, still no consensus had been reached about the internal groups of the IE family.

The method ofinternal reconstructionis used to compare patterns within onedialect,without comparison with other dialects and languages, to try to arrive at an understanding of regularities operating at an earlier stage in that dialect. It has also been used to infer information about earlier stages of PIE than can be reached by the comparative method.

The IE languages are sometimes hypothesized to be part of super-families such asNostraticorEurasiatic.

History

[edit]

Preliminary work

[edit]

Theancient Greekswere aware that their language had changed since the time ofHomer(about 730BC).Aristotle(about 330BC) identified four types of linguistic change: insertion, deletion, transposition and substitution. In the 1st century BC, the Romans were aware of the similarities between Greek and Latin.[citation needed]

In thepost-classicalWest, with the influence ofChristianity[citation needed],language studies were undermined by the attempt to derive all languages from Hebrew since the time ofSaint Augustine.Prior studies classified the European languages asJaphetic.One of the first scholars to challenge the idea of a Hebrew root to the languages of Europe wasJoseph Scaliger(1540 – 1609). He identified Greek,Germanic,Romance and Slavic language groups by comparing the word for "God" in various European languages. In 1710,Leibnizapplied ideas ofgradualismanduniformitarianismto linguistics in a short essay.[2]Like Scaliger, he rejected a Hebrew root, but also rejected the idea of unrelated language groups and considered them all to have a common source.[3]

Around the 12th century, similarities between European languages became recognised. In Iceland, scholars noted the resemblances between Icelandic and English.[citation needed]Gerald of Walesclaimed thatWelsh,Cornish,andBretonwere descendants of a common source. A study of theInsular Celticlanguages was carried out byGeorge Buchananin the 16th century and the first field study was byEdward Llwydaround 1700. He published his work in 1707,[4]shortly after translating a study byPaul-Yves Pezron[5]on Breton.[6]

Grammars of European languages other than Latin and Classical Greek began to be published at the end of the 15th century. This led to comparison between the various languages.[citation needed]

In the 16th century, visitors to India became aware of similarities between Indian and European languages. For example,Filippo Sassettireported striking resemblances between Sanskrit and Italian.[7]

Early Indo-European studies

[edit]
See also:Comparative method § Early works

In his 1647 essay,[8]Marcus Zuerius van Boxhornproposed the existence of a primitive common language he called "Scythian". He included in its descendantsDutch,German,Latin,Greek,andPersian,and his posthumously publishedOriginum Gallicarum liber[9]of 1654 addedSlavic,CelticandBaltic.[10]The 1647 essay discusses, as a first, the methodological issues in assigning languages to genetic groups. For example, he observed thatloanwordsshould be eliminated in comparative studies, and also correctly put great emphasis on common morphological systems and irregularity as indicators of relationship.[11]A few years earlier, the Silesian physicianJohann Elichmann(1601/02 – 1639) already used the expressionex eadem origine(from a common source) in a study published posthumously in 1640.[12]He related European languages toIndo-Iranian languages(which includeSanskrit).[11]

The idea that the first language was Hebrew continued to be advanced for some time:Pierre Besnier(1648 – 1705) in 1674 published a book which was translated into English the following year:A philosophical essay for the reunion of the languages, or, the art of knowing all by the mastery of one.[13]

Leibnizin 1710 proposed the concept of the so-calledJapheticlanguage group, consisting of languages now known as Indo-European, which he contrasted with the so-calledAramaiclanguages (now generally known asSemitic).

The concept of actually reconstructing an Indo-European proto-language was suggested byWilliam Wottonin 1713, while showing, among others, that Icelandic ( "Teutonic" ), the Romance languages and Greek were related.[11]

In 1741Gottfried Hensel(1687 – 1767) published a language map of the world in hisSynopsis Universae Philologiae.He still believed that all languages were derived from Hebrew.

Mikhail Lomonosovcompared numbers and other linguistic features in different languages of the world including Slavic, Baltic ( "Kurlandic" ), Iranian ( "Medic"), Finnish, Chinese,Khoekhoe( "Hottentot" ) and others. He emphatically expressed the antiquity of the linguistic stages accessible to comparative method in the drafts for hisRussian Grammarpublished in 1755:[14]

Imagine the depth of time when these languages separated!... Polish and Russian separated so long ago! Now think how long ago Kurlandic! Think when Latin, Greek, German, and Russian! Oh, great antiquity!

Gaston-Laurent Coeurdoux(1691 – 1779) sent aMémoireto the FrenchAcadémie des inscriptions et belles-lettresin 1767 in which he demonstrated the similarity between the Sanskrit, Latin, Greek, German and Russian languages.[15]

Despite the above, the discovery of the genetic relationship of the whole family of Indo-European languages is often attributed to SirWilliam Jones,a British judge inIndia,who, in a 1786 lecture (published 1788) remarked:

The Sanskrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either, yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and the forms of grammar, than could possibly have been produced by accident; so strong indeed, that no philologer could examine them all three, without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which, perhaps, no longer exists.[16]

In his 1786The Sanskrit Language,Jones postulated aproto-languageuniting six branches: Sanskrit (i.e.Indo-Aryan), Persian (i.e.Iranian), Greek, Latin,Germanicand Celtic. In many ways his work was less accurate than his predecessors', as he erroneously includedEgyptian,JapaneseandChinesein the Indo-European languages, while omittingHindi.[11]

In 1814 the young DaneRasmus Christian Rasksubmitted an entry to an essay contest on Icelandic history, in which he concluded that the Germanic languages were (as we would put it) in the same language family as Greek, Latin, Slavic, and Lithuanian. He was in doubt about Old Irish, eventually concluding that it did not belong with the others (he later changed his mind), and further decided that Finnish and Hungarian were related but in adifferent family,and that "Greenlandic" (Kalaallisut) represented yet athird.He was unfamiliar with Sanskrit at the time. Later, however, he learned Sanskrit, and published some of the earliest Western work on ancient Iranian languages.

August Schleicherwas the first scholar to compose a tentative reconstructed text in the extinctcommon sourcethat Van Boxhorn and later scholars had predicted (see:Schleicher's fable). The reconstructed Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) represents, by definition, the common language of the Proto-Indo-Europeans. This early phase culminates inFranz Bopp'sComparative Grammar[17]of 1833.

Later Indo-European studies

[edit]

The classical phase of Indo-European comparative linguistics leads from Bopp toAugust Schleicher's 1861Compendium[18]and up toKarl Brugmann's 5-volumeGrundriss[19](outline of Indo-European languages) published from 1886 to 1893. Brugmann'sNeogrammarianre-evaluation of the field andFerdinand de Saussure's proposal[20]of the concept of "consonantal schwa" (which later evolved into thelaryngeal theory) may be considered the beginning of "contemporary" Indo-European studies. The Indo-European proto-language as described in the early 1900s in its main aspects is still accepted today, and the work done in the 20th century has been cleaning up and systematizing, as well as the incorporation of new language material, notably theAnatolianandTocharianbranches unknown in the 19th century, into the Indo-European framework.

Notably, thelaryngeal theory,in its early forms barely noticed except as a clever analysis, became mainstream after the 1927[21]discovery byJerzy Kuryłowiczof the survival of at least some of these hypothetical phonemes in Anatolian.Julius Pokornyin 1959 published hisIndogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch,an updated and slimmed-down reworking of the three-volumeVergleichendes Wörterbuch der indogermanischen Sprachenof Alois Walde and Julius Pokorny (1927 – 1932). Both of these works aim to provide an overview of the lexical knowledge accumulated until the early 20th century, but with only stray comments on the structure of individual forms; in Pokorny 1959, then-recent trends of morphology and phonology (e.g., the laryngeal theory), go unacknowledged, and he largely ignores Anatolian and Tocharian data.

The generation of Indo-Europeanists active in the last third of the 20th century, such asOswald Szemerényi,Calvert Watkins,Warren Cowgill,Jochem Schindler,Helmut Rix,developed a better understanding of morphology and, in the wake of Kuryłowicz's 1956L'apophonie en indo-européen,[22]ablaut.Rix'sLexikon der indogermanischen Verbenappeared in 1997 as a first step towards a modernization of Pokorny's dictionary; corresponding tomes addressing the noun,Nomina im Indogermanischen Lexikon,appeared in 2008, and pronouns and particles,Lexikon der indogermanischen Partikeln und Pronominalstämme,in 2014.[23]Current efforts are focused on a better understanding of the relative chronology within the proto-language, aiming at distinctions of "early", "middle" and "late", or "inner" and "outer" PIE dialects, but a general consensus has yet to form. From the 1960s, knowledge of Anatolian began to be of a certainty sufficient stage to allow it to influence the image of the proto-language (see alsoIndo-Hittite).

Such attempts at recovering a sense of historical depth in PIE have been combined with efforts towards linking the history of the language with archaeology, notably with theKurgan hypothesis.J. P. Mallory's 1989In Search of the Indo-Europeansand 1997Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culturegives an overview of this. Purely linguistic research was bolstered by attempts to reconstruct the culture and mythology of the Proto-Indo-Europeans by scholars such asGeorges Dumézil,as well as by archaeology (e. g.Marija Gimbutas,Colin Renfrew) and genetics (e. g.Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza). These speculations about therealiaof Proto-Indo-European culture are however not part of the field of comparative linguistics, but rather a sister-discipline.

Criticism

[edit]

Marxists such asBruce Lincoln(himself an Indo-Europeanist) have criticized aspects of Indo-European studies believed to be overlyreactionary.[24]

In the 1980s,Georges Duméziland Indo-European studies in general came under fire from historianArnaldo Momigliano,who accused Indo-European studies of being created by fascists bent on combating "Judeo-Christian"society.[25]Momigliano was himself a veteran member of theNational Fascist Party,but was not open about this.Edgar C. Polomé,an Indo-Europeanist and co-editor ofMankind Quarterly,[26]described Momigliano and Lincoln's criticism as "unfair and vicious", and connected criticism of Indo-European studies with Marxism andpolitical correctness.[27][28]

More recently, the Swedish Marxist historianStefan Arvidssonhas followed up on Momigliano's criticism of Indo-European studies. Arvidsson considers Indo-European studies to be apseudoscientificfield, and has describedIndo-European mythologyas "the most sinister mythology of modern times".[29]In his works, Arvidsson has sought to expose what he considers to be fascist political sympathies of Indo-Europeanists, and suggested that such an exposure may result in the abolition ( "Ragnarök") of the concept of Indo-European mythology.[30]

List of Indo-European scholars

[edit]

(historical; see below for contemporary IE studies)

Contemporary IE study centres

[edit]

The following universities have institutes or faculties devoted to IE studies:

Country Universities/Institutions Scholars
Austria
Hannes A. Fellner (Vienna),[34]Ivo Hajnal(Innsbruck),Melanie Malzahn(Vienna)
Brazil University of São Paulo
Croatia University of Zagreb[35] Ranko Matasović
Czech Republic
Denmark Copenhagen[38][39][40] Birgit Anette Olsen,Thomas Olander[41]
Germany
Olav Hackstein (Munich),[citation needed]Martin Joachim Kümmel (Jena),[52]Daniel Kölligan (Würzburg),[citation needed]Ilya Yakubovich (Marburg)[53]Elisabeth Rieken (Marburg)[54]Eugen Hill (Cologne),[citation needed]Theresa Roth (Humboldt-Uni. Berlin)[citation needed],Götz keydana (Göttingen)
Italy
Silvia Luraghi (Pavia)
Netherlands Leiden[55] Leonid Kulikov,[56]Alexander Lubotsky,[57]Alwin Kloekhorst,Michaël Peyrot[58]
Poland Jagiellonian University[59] Ronald Kim (Poznań)
Slovenia Ljubljana[60] Varja Cvetko Oresnik
Spain
Francisco Rodríguez Adrados,Blanca María Prósper
Sweden Uppsala[63] Christiane Schaefer
Switzerland
Paul Widmer (Zurich)[citation needed],Michiel de Vaan(Basel)
United Kingdom
James Clackson
United States
Benjamin W. Fortson IV,[75]Hans Heinrich Hock,Jay Jasanoff,Anthony D. Yates,[76]

Winfred P. Lehmann,Hrach Martirosyan,Craig Melchert,Alan Nussbaum,Eric P. Hamp,Alexander Nikolaev,[77]Jaan Puhvel

Academic publications

[edit]

Journals

[edit]

Book series

[edit]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^"Home - Humanities Division - UCLA".Humanities Division - UCLA.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  2. ^Gottfried Leibniz, "Brevis designatio meditationum de originibus gentium, ductis potissimum ex indicio linguarum",Miscellanea Berolinensia.1710.
  3. ^Henry Hoenigswald,"Descent, Perfection and the Comparative Method since Leibniz",Leibniz, Humboldt, and the Origins of Comparativism,eds. Tullio De Mauro & Lia Formigari (Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1990), 119–134.
  4. ^Edward Lhuyd,Archaeologia Britannica: an Account of the Languages, Histories and Customs of Great Britain, from Travels through Wales, Cornwall, Bas-Bretagne, Ireland and Scotland,vol. 1, 1707.
  5. ^Paul-Yves Pezron,Antiquité de la Nation et de la langue celtes autrement appelez Gaulois(Paris: Jean Boudot, 1703).
  6. ^Daniel Le Bris, "Les études linguistiques d'Edward Lhuyd en Bretagne en 1701",La Bretagne linguistique14 (2009).
  7. ^Nunziatella Alessandrini, "Images of India through the eyes of Filippo Sassetti, a Florentine Humanist merchant in the 16th century",Sights and Insights: Interactive Images of Europe and the Wider World,ed. Mary N. Harris (Pisa: PLUS-Pisa University Press, 2007), 43–58.
  8. ^Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn,Antwoord van Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn gegeven op de Vraaghen, hem voorgestelt over de Bediedinge van de afgodinne Nehalennia, onlancx uytghegeven, in welcke de ghemeine herkomste van der Griecken, Romeinen ende Duytschen tale uyt den Scythen duydelijck bewesen, ende verscheiden oudheden van des volckeren grondelijck ontdeckt ende verklaert worden.(Leiden: Willem Christiaens vander Boxe, 1647).
  9. ^Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn,Originum Gallicarum liber. In quo veteris et nobilissimae Gallorum gentis origines, antiquitates, mores, lingua et alia eruuntur et illustrantur. Cui accedit antiquae linguae Britannicae lexicon Britannico-Latinum, cum adiectis et insertis eiusdem authoris Adagiis Britannicis sapientiae veterum Druidum reliquiis et aliis antiquitatis Britannicae Gallicaeque nonnullis monumentis(Amsterdam: apud Ioannem Ianssonium, 1654).
  10. ^Daniel Droixhe,La Linguistique et l'appel de l'histoire (1600-1800): rationalisme et révolutions positivistes(Geneva: Droz, 1978), 93-99.
  11. ^abcdRoger Blench, "Archaeology and Language: methods and issues",A Companion to Archaeology,ed. J. Bintliff (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004), 52–74.
  12. ^Johann Elichmann,Tabula Cebetis Graece, Arabice, Latine. Item aurea carmina Pythagorae(Lugduni Batavorum: Typis Iohannis Maire, 1640).
  13. ^Pierre Besnier,La reunion des langues, ou L'art de les apprendre toutes par une seule.1674.
  14. ^M. V. Lomonosov. In: Complete Edition, Moscow, 1952, vol. 7, pp 652-659:Представимъ долготу времени, которою сіи языки раздѣлились.... Польской и россійской языкъ коль давно раздѣлились! Подумай же, когда курляндской! Подумай же, когда латинской, греч., нѣм., росс. О глубокая древность!
  15. ^Gaston-Laurent Cœurdoux, “Mémoire” [Letter addressed to Abbé Barthélémy, dated 1767],Memoires de littérature de [...] l’Académie Royale des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres49 (Paris: Anquetil Duperron, 1784–93), 647–67.
  16. ^http://www.billposer.org/Papers/iephm.pdf,cited on page 14–15.
  17. ^Franz Bopp,Vergleichende Grammatik des Sanskrit, Zend, Griechischen, Lateinischen, Litauischen, Gotischen und Deutschen,6 vols. (Berlin: Druckerei der Konigl. Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1833–52 [3rd edn, 3 vols. 1868–71]); English translation by E. B. Eastwick, 1845.
  18. ^August Schleicher,Compendium der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen,2 vols. (Weimar: H. Böhlau, 1861–2).
  19. ^Karl Brugmann,Grundriß der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen,5 vols. (Strasbourg: Trübner, 1886–1893).
  20. ^Ferdinand de Saussure,Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-européennes(Leipzig: B. G. Treubner, 1879).
  21. ^Jerzy Kuryłowicz, "ə indo-européen et ḫ hittite",Symbolae grammaticae in honorem Ioannis Rozwadowski,vol. 1, eds. W. Taszycki & W. Doroszewski (1927), 95–104.
  22. ^Jerzy Kuryłowicz,L'apophonie en indo-européen(Wrocław: Zakład im. Ossolińskich, 1956), 430 p.
  23. ^"Indogermanische Nominalflexion".Archived fromthe originalon January 14, 2006.RetrievedSeptember 9,2005.
  24. ^Carlson 2008,p. 5. "Another issue is Bruce Lincoln’s overtly Marxist point of view. Marxism has traditionally criticized the neo-traditionalist and reactionary aspects of the Indo-European discourse and has been criticized by it in turn."
  25. ^Arvidsson 2006,p. 2.
  26. ^Louden, Justus & King 2000,p. 184.
  27. ^Arvidsson 2006,p. 306.
  28. ^Polomé 1999,p. 248.
  29. ^"Stefan Arvidsson".Linnaeus University.June 17, 2019.RetrievedSeptember 8,2020.
  30. ^Arvidsson 1999,pp. 353–354.
  31. ^"Die 16 Fakultäten der Universität Innsbruck".info.uibk.ac.at.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  32. ^"Universität Salzburg: Fachbereich Linguistik".Archived fromthe originalon November 21, 2005.RetrievedNovember 21,2005.
  33. ^"Institut für Sprachwissenschaft".RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  34. ^"Hannes Fellner"(in German).RetrievedJune 8,2018.
  35. ^"Filozofski fakultet u Zagrebu".ffzg.unizg.hr.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  36. ^"Ústav srovnávací jazykovědy".enlil.ff.cuni.cz.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  37. ^"Indo-European Comparative Linguistics".Masaryk University.Archived fromthe originalon September 17, 2018.RetrievedSeptember 25,2018.
  38. ^"Det Humanistiske Fakultet - Humanistiske Studier 2004".Archived fromthe originalon March 23, 2005.RetrievedMarch 23,2005.
  39. ^"Institut for Nordiske Studier og Sprogvidenskab (NorS)".indoeuropaeisk.ku.dk.March 10, 2005. Archived fromthe originalon January 6, 2017.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  40. ^jacquet (August 14, 2008)."Roots of Europe".rootsofeurope.ku.dk.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  41. ^"Staff".nors.ku.dk.August 8, 2007.RetrievedJune 8,2018.
  42. ^"Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft".RetrievedSeptember 23,2020.
  43. ^"Institut für Linguistik".uni-koeln.de.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  44. ^"Institut für Vergleichende Indogermanische Sprachwissenschaft: Startseite".indogermanistik.phil.uni-erlangen.de.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  45. ^Gippert, Jost."TITUS: INDEX".titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  46. ^"Hilfswerkzeuge für die Indogermanistik".geisteswissenschaften.fu-berlin.de(in German). July 8, 2008.RetrievedSeptember 25,2018.
  47. ^"Sprachwissenschaftliches Seminar der Universitaet Goettingen".Archived fromthe originalon April 16, 2005.RetrievedApril 16,2005.
  48. ^"Seminar für Indogermanistik und Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft".indogerm.uni-halle.de.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  49. ^"Indogermanistik in Jena".September 22, 2023.
  50. ^"Indogermanistik und Albanologie: Leitseite".Archived fromthe originalon August 5, 2005.RetrievedAugust 5,2005.
  51. ^"Lehrstuhl für Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft".Archived fromthe originalon August 28, 2005.RetrievedAugust 28,2005.
  52. ^"Prof. Dr. Martin Joachim Kümmel".oriindufa.uni-jena.de(in German).RetrievedJune 8,2018.
  53. ^"Dr. habil. Ilya Yakubovich - Philipps-Universität Marburg - Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft und Keltologie".uni-marburg.de/de/fb10/iksl/faecher/vergleichende-sprachwissenschaft(in German).RetrievedJune 8,2018.
  54. ^"Prof. Dr. Elisabeth Rieken- Philipps-Universität Marburg - Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft und Keltologie".uni-marburg.de/de/fb10/iksl/faecher/vergleichende-sprachwissenschaft(in German).RetrievedJune 8,2018.
  55. ^"Geesteswetenschappen".
  56. ^"Dr. Leonid Kulikov | Faculty of Arts and Philosophy - Research Portal".
  57. ^"Sasha Lubotsky".
  58. ^"Michaël Peyrot".Leiden University.RetrievedJune 8,2018.
  59. ^"Strona główna - Katedra Językoznawstwa Ogólnego i Indoeuropejskiego Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego".filg.uj.edu.pl.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  60. ^"Oddelek za primerjalno in splošno jezikoslovje: Department of Comparative and General Linguistics".spj.ff.uni-lj.si.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  61. ^"UCM-Departamento de Filología Clásica".www.ucm.es.
  62. ^"Departamento de Filología Clásica e Indoeuropeo".clasicas.usal.es.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  63. ^"{title}".Archived fromthe originalon June 9, 2007.RetrievedMarch 12,2008.
  64. ^"{title}".Archived fromthe originalon August 27, 2007.RetrievedJuly 23,2007.
  65. ^"{title}".Archived fromthe originalon August 11, 2007.RetrievedJuly 23,2007.
  66. ^"{title}".Archived fromthe originalon June 12, 2007.RetrievedJuly 23,2007.
  67. ^"Linguistique comparative".Archived fromthe originalon September 27, 2007.RetrievedSeptember 29,2009.
  68. ^"Indogermanisches Seminar, UNI-ZH".Archived fromthe originalon October 16, 2005.RetrievedOctober 16,2005.
  69. ^"Faculty of Linguistics, Philology and Phonetics - University of Oxford".ling-phil.ox.ac.uk.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  70. ^"Classical and Comparative Philology and Linguistics (E) — Faculty of Classics".classics.cam.ac.uk.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  71. ^"Department of Linguistics - Linguistics Cornell Arts & Sciences".ling.cornell.edu.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  72. ^"Department of Linguistics".linguistics.fas.harvard.edu.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  73. ^"UCLA Program in Indo-European Studies - Home".pies.ucla.edu.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  74. ^"UT College of Liberal Arts".utexas.edu.RetrievedSeptember 17,2018.
  75. ^"Benjamin Fortson | U-M LSA Department of Classical Studies".
  76. ^"UCLA Program in Indo-European Studies - Faculty".pies.ucla.edu.Archived fromthe originalon June 12, 2018.RetrievedJune 8,2018.
  77. ^"Alexander Nikolaev | Boston University - Academia.edu".

Sources

[edit]
[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related toIndo-European studies.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indo-European_studies&oldid=1229049132"