AIT debunked - Page 2

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Rehanism

@Rehanism

Dazzler

+ 2

Posted: 10 years ago

#11

Originally posted by: Druids
Have you looked at Malayalam, Tamil etc and even Hindi?
Did these languages suddenly develop a close similarity to Sanksrit when there have been no conversational Sanksrit around for 800 years or so?

Do you even know Sankrit to reference some Wikipedia article?

No. But Hindi and Malayalam are later languages. Hindi is a medieval language. How is that relevant to this issue? Here we are discussing if Sanskrit had its origins in India or has it descended from a foreign ancestor. Sanskrit may have spawned several modern languages, but what spawned Sanskrit? Answering that question will answer the question of origins of vedic civilization.

As for Tamil, it may have borrowed words from Sanskrit, which is obvious for coexisting languages, but Tamil is certainly not a descendent of Sanskrit.

Quote

Druids

@Druids

Explorer

Posted: 10 years ago

#12

Look, first the AIT was made up and now the west is keen to attribute the vedas to anyone but the Indians.

It's about perception. Indian languages have the most similarity to Sanskrit.

Let's say Central Asian languages were the precursor. Then what happened? Why did they give up the Sanskrit language?

Why did it survive in India alone?

Even just a couple of years ago, India thwarted US' attempts to patent ginger, neem, turmeric etc. You can't even justify these things.

If western scholars are the only ones you will believe, then I can't say anything more. You are welcome to believe what they dish out.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

Mini

@iMini

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 10 years ago

#13

@druids:High literature Malayalam is 'almost 90%' Sanskrit?
Really?!
The invasion theory is just a theory.It's up to people for which theory they want to believe in.

Quote

AnuMP

@AnuMP

Rocker

Posted: 10 years ago

#14

@Druids

Actually Indo European languages are very similar. Making emotional claims that it is not does not make it so. You don't need Wiki articles, you can check into any research university's linguistic library to prove that

http://www.usu.edu/markdamen/1320hist&civ/chapters/07ie.htm

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6097/957.figures-only

Current theory is that early human originated in Africa and migrated outward. Why would AIT matter if it was true? we are all human

Does it matter if Aryans came from Caucasus mountains? Can you tell the difference now?

About that high literature in Malayalam being mostly Sanskrit - links please! I would totally love to read it

Edited by AnuMP - 10 years ago

Quote

Druids

@Druids

Explorer

Posted: 10 years ago

#15

If you knew both Malayalam and Sanskrit languages, you would know. People can't judge for themselves nor do they bother to read the original article.

For now, there have been no peer- reviewed articles by white liberal scholars that would say so.

Until then, I guess we have to believe that anyone but the Indians wrote the vedas. And obviously European languages and Central Asian languages are closer to Sanskrit than any Indian language will ever be.

I have nothing more to say on this topic.

Quote

Mini

@iMini

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 10 years ago

#16

Malayalam and Sanskrit sound similar...many words ending with '*am' you see..I guess that it's a fusion of native languages,Sanskrit and Tamil.But it's certainly not 90% Sanskrit.
Sanskrit is known as mother of most Indo-European languages.
Malayalam is considered a Dravidian language due to the script it uses..not it's words or how it's spoken.
BTW why should you believe Indians didn't write Vedas? The citizens of ancient India wrote it,and if you go that far into who migrated from where,we all are from Africa😆

Edited by iMini - 10 years ago

Quote

Druids

@Druids

Explorer

Posted: 10 years ago

#17

@imini

It goes a bit deeper than "am" you see.

There were no Dravidians who were displaced by the invaders. This term was first used by Bishop Robert Caldwell. There was an exodus of people from the Saraswati river civilization because of a tectonic shift that caused the river to dry up.

Anyhow I suppose we are all originated from the Africans for now. 😆

Quote

Mini

@iMini

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 10 years ago

#18

Originally posted by: Druids
@imini
It goes a bit deeper than "am" you see.

There were no Dravidians who were displaced by the invaders. This term was first used by Bishop Robert Caldwell. There was an exodus of people from the Saraswati river civilization because of a tectonic shift that caused the river to dry up.

Anyhow I suppose we are all originated from the Africans for now.😆

Homo sapiens originated in Africa from where they migrated to various parts of the world.Nothing in it to suppose,it's proven.

Quote

Druids

@Druids

Explorer

Posted: 10 years ago

#19

I think that's the old chicken and egg argument. WHo was the first "Homo Sapiens"? What was the last intermediate creature before that?

I think we will leave it at that. So Africa is the cradle of civilization. That's fine by me.

Quote

AnuMP

@AnuMP

Rocker

Posted: 10 years ago

#20

I simply don't get why it would matter where they came from. The populations mixed so much that the general population now has genetic traits from both.

There was a different culture and civilization south of the Vindhyas. That was because of the natural barrier. The same natural barrier would have kept the genes apart as well till people found ways around it. So, the people north of India either came westward from the Caucasus mountains so many thousand years back or came from Africa a few millenia back. What difference does it make? The same for the people in the south.

If the concern is about who authored the Vedas, how about saying that the authors were forefathers of the current group of people known as Indians? And honestly, very few people in the West have even heard of the Vedas let alone worry about who authored them 😆

EDIT - And I can't see how evolution is a chicken or egg argument. Humans started in Africa. The mitochondrial Adam and Eve have been traced there. Egypt is known as the cradle of civilization.I haven't seen any Western scholar claim either evolution or civilization started with Europe. Why make it an us vs them debate?

Also I do understand Malayalam and would love to read the high literature that has 90% Sanskrit.

Edited by AnuMP - 10 years ago

Quote

1 2 3 4

AIT debunked - Page 2

Related Topics

Explore Topics