Re: [tied] Re: Indo-Iranian

Thank you, Piotr.

The order of branching is clear here.

I'd like to return to the Dardic problem now.

It was suggested to divide so called Dardic languages into 6 genetically homogeneous groups (Chitral, Kunar etc.). In other words we know now 8 different Indo-Aryan sub-branches - Mitanni IA, the Indic languages proper (the Prakrits, Sanskrit, Vedic and their descendants) and 6 other independent "Dardic" subgroups.

The first branch which split off was Mitanni IA.

What a branch was the second? We know it was not Indic proper - otherwise the Dardic languages would form a cluster. This means that some of the Dardic branches split off earlier, other remained a whole with Indic proper (future Prakrits).

The question is: which of the Dardic branches was the last one parted with Indic proper?

Alexander

----- Original Message -----

From: Piotr Gasiorowski

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 7:23 PM

Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Indo-Iranian

14-06-03 16:48 Alexander Stolbov wrote:

May I reformulate the question?

Are there innovations shared by all Prakrits and all Dardic languages but absent in Mitanni Indo-Aryan?
Yes. The monophthongisation of /ai, au/ > /e:, o:/ (Mitanni IA aika- 'one', Skt. eka-, Kalasha ek-, etc.), the change of *-azdH- > *-aidH- > -edH- (but Mitanni IA -ma-as^-da *[mazdHa]), and of *g^H > *dz'H > h in Sanskrit, the Prakrits and the Dardic languages alike (Mitanni IA spelling clearly indicates a still coronal consonant, possibly *[z'(H)]; the Nuristani languages preserve it as an affricate /dz/!).

Piotr