Bahasa Sanskerta
Catatan kaki

1 2  "In conclusion, there are strong systemic and paleographic indications that the Brahmi script derived from a Semitic prototype, which, mainly on historical grounds, is most likely to have been Aramaic. However, the details of this problem remain to be worked out, and in any case, it is unlikely that a complete letter-by-letter derivation will ever be possible; for Brahmi may have been more of an adaptation and remodeling, rather than a direct derivation, of the presumptive Semitic prototype, perhaps under the influence of a preexisting Indian tradition of phonetic analysis. However, the Semitic hypothesis 1s not so strong as to rule out the remote possibility that further discoveries could drastically change the picture. In particular, a relationship of some kind, probably partial or indirect, with the protohistoric Indus Valley script should not be considered entirely out of the question." Salomon 1998, hlm. 30
↑  Meski semua capaian itu dikerdilkan oleh tradisi linguistik Sanskerta yang berpuncak pada tata bahasa terkenal dari Panini, yang berjudul Astadhyayi. Keanggunan dan kelengkapan arsitektur (tata bahasanya) belum bisa dilampaui oleh bahasa manapun, dan metode cerdasnya dalam mengelompokkan pemakaian dan penyebutannya, bahasa dan metabahasanya, dan teorema dan metateoremanya, mengungguli penemuan-penemuan penting dalam filsafat Barat selama beribu-ribu tahun.
↑  Tradisi gramatikal Sanskerta juga merupakan asal-usul ditemukannya angka "nol", yang begitu diadopsi sebagai sistem angka Arab, memungkinkan kita untuk melampaui notasi rumit aritmetika Romawi.
↑  Orang India yang melaporkan bahasa Sanskerta sebagai bahasa ibu mereka sebanyak 6.106 pada 1981, 49.736 pada 1991, 14.135 pada 2001, dan 24.821 pada 2011.
↑  William Jones (1786), dikutip oleh Thomas Burrow dalam The Sanskrit Language: Bahasa Sanskerta, di samping kekunoannya, memiliki struktur yang menarik; lebih sempurna daripada Yunani, lebih lengkap daripada Yunani, lebih halus daripada keduanya, tetapi kedekatannya kuat, baik dalam akar kata kerja dan tata bahasanya,  daripada yang dihasilkan secara kebetulan, sehingga tidak ada filolog yang mampu menguji ketiganya, sebelum meyakini bahwa ketiganya berasal dari "satu sumber yang sama", yang mungkin sudah tiada lagi. Ada alasan yang mirip, meski tak dipaksakan, untuk menganggap bahwa bahasa Got dan Kelt, meski berpadu dengan idiom berbeda, memiliki asal yang sama dengan Sanskerta dan Persia Kuno mungkin bisa dimasukkan dalam rumpun yang sama."
↑  Traktat Mitanni diduga berangka abad ke-16 SM, tetapi masih diperdebatkan.
↑  Contoh kemiripan kosakata yang disorot dalam Weda adalah kata Dyaus Pita dalam bahasa Weda yang bermakna "Bapak Langit". Ekuivalen dengan bahasa Yunani Mikenai Zeus Pater, yang berevolusi menjadi Jupiter dalam Latin. Kesamaan frasa "Bapak Langit" juga ditemukan dalam bahasa Indo-Eropa lainnya.
↑  Pāṇini's use of the term lipi has been a source of scholarly disagreements. Harry Falk in his 1993 overview states that ancient Indians neither knew nor used writing script, and Pāṇini's mention is likely a reference to Semitic and Greek scripts. In his 1995 review, Salomon questions Falk's arguments and writes it is "speculative at best and hardly constitutes firm grounds for a late date for Kharoṣṭhī. The stronger argument for this position is that we have no specimen of the script before the time of Ashoka, nor any direct evidence of intermediate stages in its development; but of course this does not mean that such earlier forms did not exist, only that, if they did exist, they have not survived, presumably because they were not employed for monumental purposes before Ashoka". According to Hartmut Scharfe, Lipi of Pāṇini may be borrowed from the Old Persian Dipi, in turn derived from Sumerian Dup. Scharfe adds that the best evidence, at the time of his review, is that no script was used in India, aside from the Northwest Indian subcontinent, before around 300 BCE because Indian tradition "at every occasion stresses the orality of the cultural and literary heritage." Kenneth Norman states writing scripts in ancient India evolved over the long period of time like other cultures, that it is unlikely that ancient Indians developed a single complete writing system at one and the same time in the Maurya era. It is even less likely, states Norman, that a writing script was invented during Ashoka's rule, starting from nothing, for the specific purpose of writing his inscriptions and then it was understood all over South Asia where the Ashoka pillars are found. Jack Goody states that ancient India likely had a "very old culture of writing" along with its oral tradition of composing and transmitting knowledge, because the Vedic literature is too vast, consistent and complex to have been entirely created, memorized, accurately preserved and spread without a written system. Falk disagrees with Goody, and suggests that it is a Western presumption and inability to imagine that remarkably early scientific achievements such as Pāṇini's grammar (5th to 4th century BCE), and the creation, preservation and wide distribution of the large corpus of the Brahmanic Vedic literature and the Buddhist canonical literature, without any writing scripts. Johannes Bronkhorst disagrees with Falk, and states, "Falk goes too far. It is fair to expect that we believe that Vedic memorisation—though without parallel in any other human society—has been able to preserve very long texts for many centuries without losing a syllable. [...] However, the oral composition of a work as complex as Pāṇini's grammar is not only without parallel in other human cultures, it is without parallel in India itself. [...] It just will not do to state that our difficulty in conceiving any such thing is our problem".
↑  Pali is also an extinct language.
↑  The oldest surviving Sanskrit inscription in the Kathmandu valley is dated to 464 CE.