Talk:Indo-European studies

message: I was wondering, do anyone here know the best books to buy to get a general overview of Indo-European scholarship and studies, particularly its religion, and as well as of the current discussions in the field. I've looked around for a number of books, but I'm not sure what the best ones to get are. Any help is accepted. Thanks in advance. Satanael 13:24, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the EIEC gives a good overview of the field, a bit heavy on archaeology, and it's reasonably recent too. Oswald Szemerenyi's Introduction is rather advanced for its title, but certainly recommendable. dab (ᛏ) 14:31, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

text: J. P. Mallory's In Search of the Indo-Europeans. Zyxwv99 (talk) 16:48, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Books 

message: political ideologies of individual scholars is not "criticism" of the field by any stretch. We can well discuss ideological currents that affected the field in the past, in the "history" section. This has nothing to do with "criticism", but simply amounts to generally acknowledged events in the field's (rather remote) history. dab (𒁳) 16:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I quite agree. Aspects of the field have been abused in politics. This is, as such, not a criticism of the field, but a criticism of people who abuse linguistic scholarship for political purposes. The case is perfectly comparable to nuclear physics being abused to kill people. But in the physics case, actual results are abused for such ends, while in the field of linguistics, it isn't so much results as obstruse speculations loosely based on results that have a political impact. dab (𒁳) 19:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I think we agree that the debate about IES and fascism (e.g. Dumézil, Indo-Europeanists and the Nazi regime, Haudry, Pearson) deserves a mention. If you want, we can ask User:Paul Barlow, who has been using the same source, if he could write a better write-up. --RF 19:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

text: This is not a methodical issue specific to Indo-European linguistics, but an issue found throughout the social sciences, including, for example, history: Given that hypotheses can rarely if ever be verified to the level of 5 σ confidence, we must be content with much lower probabilities, some higher, some relatively low (for example, the steppe hypothesis may only have a probability of as low as 60%, yet still higher than all of its contenders, even summed, which would still make it the best hypothesis among several alternatives). --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:05, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: "Criticism"

message: I'm removing the statement that Indo-European studies is due to be closed in Hamburg as the claim has been tagged as needing a source for many months. If anyone can find a source, feel free to re-add it. —Angr 18:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced statement removed 

message: It has been suggested on Template talk:Indo-European studies that this page be moved to Indo-European linguistics because it deals exclusively with this aspect of IE, while other topics like society and religion have their own pages. For more details, see Template talk:Indo-European studies. Suggestions and comments are welcome. Thank you --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 09:20, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But in practice, the article Indo-European studies is actually just about Indo-European linguistics. —Angr 10:53, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure what you mean... it is about Indo-European studies, viz., it sketches the history of the field and lists scholars and journals. Of course Indo-European studies is primarily about comparative linguistics. But especially the "Gimbutanist" JIES of which the field is eponymous has featured a lot of archaeological material. But the main point is that Indo-European studies are significantly philological, which may or may not be equivalent to "linguistic", depending on where (and when) you live. --dab (𒁳) 11:30, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What I mean is that in its current state, the article barely mentions any aspect of IE studies other than IE linguistics. —Angr 11:38, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If this article should cover the non-linguistic topics as well, perhaps we should include a short section explicitly stating that the mentioned methods are used to reconstruct society, religion etc. as well. Especially the lead sounds as if "IE studies" were a purely linguistic science. The three words "...and its speakers..." don't make this point any clearer. By the way, this would make it easy to rename the Template:Indo-European studies to Template:Indo-European language since it really just deals with the language. The Template:Indo-European topics includes the more general topics anyway. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 11:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

text: An article covering the topic of Indo-European linguistics itself might have the same scope as Proto-Indo-European language, since the topic of study of IE linguistics is reconstructing PIE, but not the same scope as Indo-European languages, which is an article about a language family of mostly still-living languages. —Angr 17:31, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move proposal 

message: There is a valid  debate as to the reliability and the status of PIE reconstructions, within the field. 
I.e. does PIE constructs reflect a "real" language spoken at some point in the past, or are they simply arithmetical symbols expressing etymological correspondences without reflecting any historical stage directly. This discussion can and should be reflected. But it will not do to misrepresent such references into an insinuation that there is a minority or even majority opinion that the entire field is flawed or "obsolete" or that "PIE is a myth" is not acceptable. The comments by  at the top of this page is a perfect illustration of the recurring deterioration of the article by uninformed editors trying to represent a "controversy" they heard about. 
The nature of PIE reconstructions should be discussed at PIE, based on an informed presentation of the opinion of actual experts, by editors who are familiar with the field. --dab (𒁳) 14:49, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Criticism of PIE"

message: We should note who first realized the various branches were IE. We talk a bit about Celtic, but what about Albanian, Armenian (at first assumed to be Iranian, I believe), Nuristani, and the reasonably well attested extinct branches? kwami (talk) 07:40, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  dates for the various branches 

message: * I am introducing new concepts such as base Indo-European, multi-pie hypothesis
The Demise of the Dravidian, Vedic and Paramunda Indus myths
I am publishing my sixth research paper directly online as it is an extension of my previous papers. Kindly read pages 4 to 18 as it contains a detailed discussion of the term ‘Aryan’. This paper shows why the Dravidian, Vedic and Paramunda Indus theories are not tenable.
 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/136268397/The-demise-of-the-Dravidian-Vedic-and-Paramunda-Indus-myths
 
Methods to reconstruct the languages of the Harappans were presented in the present and previous papers. We hope other scholars take up the exercise of reconstructing the languages of the Indus Valley civilization!
 
The older papers were written taking the assumptions of the 19th century school of Indology as a base and working backwards. These may appear to be outdated now (at the end of our very long journey). However, the fundamentals are still correct.
 
Part one
 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/27103044/Sujay-NPAP-Part-One
 
Part Two very,very important!
 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/27105677/Sujay-Npap-Part-Two
 
(These comprise the complete and comprehensive solution to the Aryan problem)
 
Literacy in pre-Buddhist India (before 600 BC)
 
Literacy in pre-Buddhist India (before 600 BC)
 
Please find my collection of papers on literacy in Pre-Buddhist India
 
Before mature phase of Indus valley civilization (before 2600 BC)
 
- There are some potters marks but none qualify as full writing
 
Indus valley civilization (2600 BC to 1900 BC)
 
1. The reconfirmation and reinforcement of the Indus script thesis (very logical and self explanatory paper)
 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/46387240/Sujay-Indus-Script-Final-Version-Final-Final
 
2. The reintroduction of the lost manuscript hypothesis (the case for this thesis has obviously become much stronger in the recent past)
 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/111707419/Sujay-Indus-Reintroducing-Lost-Manuscript-Hypothesis
 
Post-Harappan India (1600 BC to 600 BC)
 
1. Literacy in post-Harappan india (obviously literacy in post-Harappan India existed in certain pockets & were limited to very small sections of society- alphabetic scripts were brought from West Asia and the Indus script also continued – this a very logical and self-explanatory paper and anyone can cross-verify the conclusions)
 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/127306265/Sujay-Post-Harappan-Literacy-and-origin-of-Brahmi
 
Sujay Rao Mandavilli
 
182.72.239.115 (talk) 16:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please find all my 6 papers 

message: Armenian is an Indo-European language spoken in the Republic of Armenia and in the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. They should be noted on the map.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.119.138.205 (talk) 02:38, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map is wrong. Armenia should be in dark green 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Indo-European studies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060114014031/http://www.indogermanistik.uni-freiburg.de:80/projekt.html to http://www.indogermanistik.uni-freiburg.de/projekt.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20051102080042/http://www.uni-heidelberg.de:80/institute/fak9/INDOG/ to http://www.uni-heidelberg.de/institute/fak9/INDOG/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:05, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 12 external links on Indo-European studies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051121124921/http://www.sbg.ac.at/spr/home.htm to http://www.sbg.ac.at/spr/home.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050323031659/http://www.humanist.ku.dk/studier/Beskrivelser/Indoeuropaeisk/default.htm to http://www.humanist.ku.dk/studier/beskrivelser/Indoeuropaeisk/default.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050830150126/http://www.indogermanistik.uni-bonn.de/index.htm to http://www.indogermanistik.uni-bonn.de/index.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051123124058/http://www.tu-dresden.de/slk/tischler/home.htm to http://www.tu-dresden.de/slk/tischler/home.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050416075610/http://wwwuser.gwdg.de/~uhsw/ to http://wwwuser.gwdg.de/~uhsw/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051112092417/http://www.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/IPhASI/index.htm to http://www.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/IPhASI/index.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050319232806/http://www.uni-marburg.de/ios/sprachwissenschaft/welcome.html to http://www.uni-marburg.de/ios/sprachwissenschaft/welcome.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050805022044/http://www.indogermanistik.lmu.de/index.htm to http://www.indogermanistik.lmu.de/index.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050901180414/http://www-zope.uni-regensburg.de:8080/Fakultaeten/phil_Fak_IV/Indogermanistik/ to http://www-zope.uni-regensburg.de:8080/Fakultaeten/phil_Fak_IV/Indogermanistik/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050828031106/http://www.uni-wuerzburg.de/vergl-sprachwiss/idg.html to http://www.uni-wuerzburg.de/vergl-sprachwiss/idg.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927222156/http://www2.unine.ch/linguistique/page3939.html to http://www2.unine.ch/linguistique/page3939.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051016080256/http://www.indoger.unizh.ch/ to http://www.indoger.unizh.ch/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:18, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I only wish to document two potential highly reliable sources that have personally provided me with a wealth of information that seems highly credible.  The linguistics book on Proto-Indo-European, in particular, takes an impressive belt-and-suspenders approach to documenting disagreements between linguists, ethnographers, and archaeologists about the significance of the work product of linguists with regard to Proto-Indo-European, to ethnography and culture studies of Indo-European culture.  The archaeology book apologizes for relying heavily on Soviet-era archaeology and it's old-style "pots are people" ethnography values, but then goes into huge detail in its presentation of the precursive past, emergence, and post-Proto stages of Indo-European culture:
* The Oxford Introduction to Proto-Indo-European and the Proto-Indo-European World
* The Wheel, the Horse, and Language
I'm not editing the article as I lack the competence but would heartily recommend that Wikipedia's real experts have a look at these books.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.89.39.188 (talk) 03:09, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Potential Reliable Sources

message: The "Criticism" section gives undue weight to Marxist positions. 159.205.196.195 (talk) 14:55, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not right-wing by any stretch of the imagination, but it is utterly laughable that we do indeed give undue weight to followers of an ideology that has murdered thousands upon thousands of people and always leads people to support pseudoscientific and pseudohistorical views, as is evidenced by Stefan Arvidsson's bizarre claim that Indo-European mythology is the most sinister, despite the fact it is no more sinister than Semitic mythology or Sino-Tibetan mythology. Marxists seem to hate Europeans for some extremely odd reason and this nonsensical "criticism" seems to be tied more to this rather than the fact that SOME scholars interested in Indo-European studies were racist or fascist (which is utterly terrible but Marxism should be in the same bracket!). These Marxists ignore the fact that a great deal of Indo-European people are not actually European but Asia, such as Hindus and Iranians. They seem to constantly be drawing a relationship to Nazism despite the fact that the Nazis were not exactly a pan-Indo-European movement, as evidence by the fact that a great number of their "racially inferior" victims were Indo-Europeans (Slavs especially). As per usual these "criticisms" of Marxists are not at all noteworthy but the Marxist clique - ideologues following a disturbing and sinister ideology of cult-like behaviour and brutality - on Wikipedia would love readers to think they are. - The Mummy (not signed in). 150.143.58.75 (talk) 07:55, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undue weight 

message: This has been recently worked on, but could still go a long way before removing the incompleteness note. Formatting-wise, I'm vaguely considering splitting the table to be one-row-per-university, but still primarily sorted by country (with rowspan= formatting) to better highlight where we do not list current professors; the list does not seem long enough to be in need of sortability.
In complete omissions, Russia seems like the biggest missing locale so far. Are there any other countries missing entirely? I'd wonder about Greece next of all (but maybe their IEists all stick to Ancient Greek or Classics departments). --Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 20:34, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Study centers 

message: This sentence:  "The IE languages are sometimes hypothesized to be part of super-families such as Nostratic or Eurasiatic."
... is in the Study Methods section. But why? What does it have to do with Study Methods? In fact, what does it have to do with Indo-European studies, the topic of this article? Omc (talk) 03:15, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence out of place? (super-families...)