Is Sanskrit Dravidian ?

S.Kalyanaraman kalyan99 at NETSCAPE.NET
Mon Jul 5 22:47:49 UTC 1999

I have not followed the thread fully; are the following etyma of the same
inheritance or re-borrowings from some proto-indian substrate?

DEDR 1974: kelngam yoke (Parji); kelman (Gadba)
DEDR 3694: nukam yoke (; nu.n (Kota); noga (Kannad.a,
On the relationship between Hungarian and Dravidian min: is Rigvedic Vis.n.u
explained in the context of the Dravidian (DEDR 5396) vin. sky, heaven; bin-ye
name of the god of thunder and lightning (Maltese); cf. min shine (DEDR 4876).

Hans Henrich Hock <hhhock at STAFF.UIUC.EDU> wrote:
> Yes, the morphemes in these endings and the morphology that combines the
> morphemes in all three languages are inherited from Proto-Indo-European.
> The phonetic differences result from regular sound changes applicable in
> these phonological contexts.  For a complete cognate word set with these
> endings see Skt. yug-a-m : Gk. zug-o-n : Lat. iug-u-m 'yoke'.
> For details on these correspondences and the sound changes involved I would
> suggest you consult a comparative Indo-European grammar.
> abhivaadaye,
> Hans Henrich Hock
> >Hans Henrich Hock wrote:
> >>
> >> As they say in the vernacular, "facts is facts".
> >>
> >
> >But as much as the AI theorists might hate to admit it, we are dealing
> >with theory here.
> >
> >Are you really saying that Latin -um, Greek -on and Sanskrit -am are
> >related?
> >
> >I would think better of someone with your credentials (but can excuse
> >Lars).
> >
> >Regards,
> >Paul Kekai Manansala

Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list