On the position of Nuristani within Indo-Iranian

Himalayan Linguistics, 2021

Recent years have seen an increase in the variety of language names used in linguistic works for the Nuristani languages (Indo-Iranian), which are spoken in Eastern Afghanistan and to some extent across the border in Northern Pakistan. This increase is driven by efforts to recognize local practices, but it has also created confusion and inconsistencies in many areas, making terminological justifications a necessary part of every publication regarding these languages. A unified terminology would not only be convenient for linguists and other researchers, in so far as scientific usage can influence colloquial practices it would also increase the visibility and recognizability of the languages of this little-known language family on the national and international level, thus also potentially benefiting the native speaking communities. The proposals given in this paper aim to create an internally consistent terminology that is scientifically precise, accurate, and recognizable for speakers, while also being congruent with the naming principles put forward for the Glottolog database.

International Journal of Diachronic Linguistics and Linguistic Reconstruction, 2022

This article illustrates the potential of historical phonology to generate insights for various other fields of research concerned with Nuristani languages. Three examples are discussed: The names of pre-Islamic deities, the areal spread of retroflex affricates and the unclear classification of Dameli.

This paper presents a first account of Kholosi, a language spoken in two villages in the Zagros Mountains of western Hormozgan Province in south-west Iran. After providing an overview of language distribution in the region, we recount the “discovery” and initial documentation of the Kholosi language. A description of the language situation is accompanied by observations relating to the origins and history of the language community, reputedly shipwrecked in past centuries before settling in its present location in the mountains. We then provide a sample of vocabulary and an overview of selected elements of the language’s structure. Through comparisons with the surrounding Southwestern Iranian languages as well as Indo-Aryan languages in the wider region, we conclude that Kholosi is in fact an Indo-Aryan language that has absorbed features of surrounding Iranian languages through long-standing and intense contact. Since it shows disparate similarities to each of the four Indo-Aryan languages used in the comparisons, its position within Indo-Aryan remains unclear. The article concludes with reflections on the importance – and urgency – of language documentation in the Iranian context.

Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 2007

The final contribution, by Donald Stilo, is a study of "ad-positions''; this is a portmanteau word which includes prepositions, postpositions, and combinations of both. If Stilo were interested in history, he would have noticed that the history of Iranian (and Indian) shows that the original state of affairs showed only prepositions, which governed certain cases with nouns, or with preverbs (detatched or not) on verbs. In the oldest phases, "preverbs'' could stand anywhere in the sentence/phrase. It seems clear that postpositions developed much later, mostly as adverbs from case-forms of nouns or adjectives. Using them both together as "circumpositions'' must be later still. This is probably a sufficiently clear and concise statement for Indo-Iranian, and makes much of Stilo's 'Universals Theory' redundant. Still, one must commend his industry in trawling through all manner of languages. But he does not mention Turkic, which does not like pure prepositions, preferring postpositions formed from adverbs and suffixed to nouns. The examples given are often rather unperspicuous: some means of marking the 'adpositions' cited is necessary. In his "counterexamples'' he notes that some prepositions in some languages have two contrary meanings, such as "to'' and "from'' (e.g. in Tālešī), only made clear by a following postposition. To his many citations from Iranian languages he might like to add Pashto to his lists for circumpositions disambiguating certain prepositions. The bibliography contains some works on "universals'', with several descriptive of Kurdish-but not MacKenzie's Kurdish Dialect Studies. This book is an impressive collection of essays, in which some are more impressive than others. Apart from the complete lack of adequate maps, I must commend the editors for producing a most stimulating volume.

Journal of Diachronic Linguistics and Linguistic Reconstruction, 2022

The reconstruction of the ancestral stage of Nuristani languages is still in statu nascendi, and this paper discusses three aspects of its state and progress. First, it surveys three idioms of uncertain or debated affiliation (Dameli, Tregami, Zemiaki) and suggests not to utilize their data in the first approach to reconstructing Proto-Nuristani, with the rider that reconstructed elements can be readjusted later. The second, main part of the paper discusses the results of reconstruction attempts available so far in publications ranging from shorter notes to systematic analyses of Nuristani etyma. The third section considers the implications of linguistic reconstruction and cladistics for the prehistory of Nuristani languages, focusing on some idiosyncratic features of Prasun.

The new science of Genetic is powerful method to show the most likely homeland of Indo-Iranian Aryan people of central Asian steppe from south of Russia and their wave of migration to Indian subcontinent and Iran.

2026

To explore the place of the Asura civilization in the history of ancient Persia and the surrounding regions, traditional sources are examined including the Rigveda and the Avesta. The evidence suggests a continuous indigenous culture consisting of related Asuras and Suras extending from the South Caucasus to the Indian subcontinent during the Rigvedic era. Between 12000 and 11300 BCE, the Asuras emerged as formidable rulers in West Asia, expanding their kingdom to the region of Sapta Sindhu and the banks of the Saraswati River in India. However, a multigenerational political conflict between the Suras (Devas) and Asuras during the Rigvedic period resulted in a substantial migration of the Asuras from India to Persia around 11200 BCE. The Vedic period of Indian civilization was marked by this ongoing conflict between the Devas and Asuras. Initially descendants of two stepbrothers , the Devas and Asuras eventually gave rise to two distinct traditions of Vedic literature due to their political rivalry. The Devas adhered to the tradition of the four Vedas, while the Asuras followed the Asura-veda. Around 11300 BCE, Shambara, the Asura king, presented a significant challenge to Indra, a descendant of the Indra lineage and the husband of Shachi. Ultimately, Indra defeated Shambara and reclaimed the Sapta Sindhu region along with parts of the Kabul and Kandahar regions. Following their defeat by the Devas led by Indra, the Asuras migrated from the Sarasvati River region and settled in Afghanistan, Persia, and the South Caucasus. More details of the chronology of the ancient Persian civilization are given in Chapter 11, Vol. 2 of my book in two volumes: Chronology and Origins of Indo-European Civilizations. Linguistic and religious similarities

Archaeologicall data, textual sources and linguistic evidence have preserved different aspecß of antiquity. Each of these sources requires its own special methods of study, and yields a limited reoonsruction of the past. The various reconstructions may overlap in one or more basic aspects: time, space, content, and extemal relationships. These partial overlaps may be sufficient for a conect correlation. As the different sources usually provide complementary information, their integration will produce new knowledge. Texts and languages can be dated and located with the help of archaeology, and material remains can be interpreted with the help of texts and vice versa. There are many pitfalls and difficulties, of course, of which one must be awa¡e.2 But if the case has reasonable chances of success, we should attempt an integrated hypothesis that in the best possible way ñts in with the facts. Quite apart from possible omissions, misunderstandings and logical e¡rors, no such higher level reconstruction can ever claim ñnality. New excavations and analyses are constantly refining our understanding of archaeological cultures, and simila¡ changes in our knowledge are being brought about by newly discovered texts, languages, etymologies, and so forth. Indeed,