The Indo-European languages (also called Indo-Germanic languages123) are a family (or phylum) of several hundred related languages and dialects4 including most major languages of Europe the Iranian plateau and South Asia and historically also predominant in Anatolia. With written attestations appearing since the Bronze Age in the form of the Anatolian languages and Mycenaean Greek the Indo-European family is significant to the field of historical linguistics as possessing the longest recorded history after the Afroasiatic family.

Indo-European languages are spoken by almost three billion native speakers5 the largest number for any recognised language family. Of the twenty languages with the largest numbers of native speakers according to SIL Ethnologue twelve are Indo-European: Spanish English Hindi Portuguese Bengali Russian German Marathi French Italian Punjabi and Urdu accounting for over 1.7 billion native speakers.6 Several disputed proposals link Indo-European to other major language families. Contents 1 History of Indo-European linguistics 2 Classification 2.1 Grouping 2.2 Tree versus wave model 2.3 Proposed subgroupings 2.4 Satem and centum languages 2.5 Suggested macrofamilies 3 Evolution 3.1 Proto-Indo-European 3.2 Diversification 3.3 Sound changes 3.4 Comparison of conjugations 3.5 Comparison of cognates 4 See also 5 Citations and notes 6 References 7 Further reading 8 External links 8.1 Databases 8.2 Lexica History of Indo-European linguistics Main article: Indo-European studies

Suggestions of similarities between Indian and European languages began to be made by European visitors to India in the 16th century. In 1583 Thomas Stephens an English Jesuit missionary in Goa noted similarities between Indian languages specifically Konkani and Greek and Latin. These observations were included in a letter to his brother which was not published until the twentieth century.7

The first account by a western European to mention the ancient language Sanskrit came from Filippo Sassetti (born in Florence Italy in 1540) a merchant who traveled to the Indian subcontinent. Writing in 1585 he noted some word similarities between Sanskrit and Italian (these included deva/dio "God" sarpa/serpe "serpent" sapta/sette "seven" aa/otto "eight" nava/nove "nine").7 However neither Stephens' nor Sassetti's observations led to further scholarly inquiry.7

In 1647 Dutch linguist and scholar Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn noted the similarity among Indo-European languages and supposed that they derived from a primitive common language which he called "Scythian". He included in his hypothesis Dutch Greek Latin Persian and German later adding Slavic Celtic and Baltic languages. However Van Boxhorn's suggestions did not become widely known and did not stimulate further research.

Gaston Coeurdoux and others had made observations of the same type. Coeurdoux made a thorough comparison of Sanskrit Latin and Greek conjugations in the late 1760s to suggest a relationship between them. Similarly Mikhail Lomonosov compared different languages groups of the world including Slavic Baltic ("Kurlandic") Iranian ("Medic") Finnish Chinese "Hottentot" and others. He emphatically expressed the antiquity of the linguistic stages accessible to comparative method in the drafts for his Russian Grammar (published 1755).8

The hypothesis reappeared in 1786 when Sir William Jones first lectured on the striking similarities between three of the oldest languages known in his time: Latin Greek and Sanskrit to which he tentatively added Gothic Celtic and Old Persian9 though his classification contained some inaccuracies and omissions.10dead link

It was Thomas Young who first used the term Indo-European in 181311 which became the standard scientific term (except in Germany12) through the work of Franz Bopp whose systematic comparison of these and other old languages supported the theory. Bopp's Comparative Grammar appearing between 1833 and 1852 counts as the starting point of Indo-European studies as an academic discipline.

The classical phase of Indo-European comparative linguistics leads from Franz Bopp's Comparative Grammar (1833) to August Schleicher's 1861 Compendium and up to Karl Brugmann's Grundriss published from the 1880s. Brugmann's junggrammatische reevaluation of the field and Ferdinand de Saussure's development of the laryngeal theory may be considered the beginning of "modern" Indo-European studies. The generation of Indo-Europeanists active in the last third of the 20th century (such as Calvert Watkins Jochem Schindler and Helmut Rix) developed a better understanding of morphology and in the wake of Kuryowicz's 1956 Apophonie understanding of the ablaut. Classification Further information: List of languages by first written accounts Indo-European language family. Indo-European topics Indo-European languages (list) Albanian  Armenian  Baltic Celtic  Germanic  Greek Indo-Iranian (Indo-Aryan Iranian) Italic  Slavic   extinct: Anatolian  Paleo-Balkan (Dacian Phrygian Thracian)  Tocharian Proto-Indo-European language Vocabulary  Phonology  Sound laws  Ablaut  Root  Noun  Verb   Indo-European language-speaking peoples Europe: Balts  Slavs  Albanians  Italics  Celts  Germanic peoples  Greeks  Paleo-Balkans (Illyrians  Thracians  Dacians)  Asia: Anatolians (Hittites Luwians)   Armenians   Indo-Iranians (Iranians  Indo-Aryans)   Tocharians   Proto-Indo-Europeans Homeland  Society  Religion   Indo-European archaeology Abashevo culture  Afanasevo culture  Andronovo culture  Baden culture  Beaker culture  Catacomb culture  Cernavod culture  Chassen culture  Chernoles culture  Corded Ware culture  Cucuteni-Trypillian culture  Dnieper-Donets culture  Gumelnia-Karanovo culture  Gushi culture  Karasuk culture  Kemi Oba culture  Khvalynsk culture  Kura-Araxes culture  Lusatian culture  Maykop culture  Middle Dnieper culture  Narva culture  Novotitorovka culture  Poltavka culture  Potapovka culture  Samara culture  Seroglazovo culture  Sredny Stog culture  Srubna culture  Terramare culture  Usatovo culture  Vuedol culture  Yamna culture   Indo-European studies The various subgroups of the Indo-European language family include ten major branches given in the chronological order of their earliest surviving written attestations: Anatolian languages the earliest attested branch. Isolated terms in Old Assyrian sources from the 19th century BC Hittite texts from about the 16th century BC; extinct by Late Antiquity. Hellenic languages fragmentary records in Mycenaean Greek from the late 15th - early 14th century BC; Homeric texts date to the 8th century BC. (See Proto-Greek language History of the Greek language.) Indo-Iranian languages descended from Proto-Indo-Iranian (dated to the late 3rd millennium BC). Iranian languages attested from roughly 1000 BC in the form of Avestan. Epigraphically from 520 BC in the form of Old Persian (Behistun inscription). Indo-Aryan languages or Indic languages attested from the late 15th - early 14th century BC in Mitanni texts showing traces of Indo-Aryan. Epigraphically from the 3rd century BC in the form of Prakrit (Edicts of Ashoka). The Rigveda is assumed to preserve intact records via oral tradition dating from about the mid-2nd millennium BC in the form of Vedic Sanskrit. Dardic languages Nuristani languages Italic languages including Latin and its descendants (the Romance languages) attested from the 7th century BC. Celtic languages descended from Proto-Celtic. Gaulish inscriptions date as early as the 6th century BC; Celtiberian from the 2nd century BC; Old Irish manuscript tradition from about the 8th century AD and there are inscriptions in Old Welsh from the same period. Germanic languages (from Proto-Germanic) earliest testimonies in runic inscriptions from around the 2nd century AD earliest coherent texts in Gothic 4th century AD. Old English manuscript tradition from about the 8th century AD. Armenian language alphabet writings known from the beginning of the 5th century AD. Tocharian languages extant in two dialects (Turfanian and Kuchean) attested from roughly the 6th to the 9th century AD. Marginalized by the Old Turkic Uyghur Khaganate and probably extinct by the 10th century. Balto-Slavic languages believed by most Indo-Europeanists13 to form a phylogenetic unit while a minority ascribes similarities to prolonged language contact. Slavic languages (from Proto-Slavic) attested from the 9th century AD (possibly earlier; see Slavic runes) earliest texts in Old Church Slavonic. Baltic languages attested from the 14th century AD; for languages attested that late they retain unusually many archaic features attributed to Proto-Indo-European (PIE). Albanian language attested from the 14th century AD; Proto-Albanian likely emerged from Paleo-Balkan predecessors.1415 In addition to the classical ten branches listed above several extinct and little-known languages have existed: Illyrian languages related to Messapian. Venetic language close to Italic and possibly Continental Celtic. Liburnian language apparently grouped with Venetic. Messapian language not conclusively deciphered. Phrygian language language of ancient Phrygia possibly close to Thracian Greek and Armeniancitation needed. Paionian language extinct language once spoken north of Macedon. Thracian language possibly including Dacian. Dacian language possibly very close to Thracian. Ancient Macedonian language proposed relationships to Greek Illyrian Thracian and Phrygian. Ligurian language possibly not Indo-European; possibly close to or part of Celtic. Lusitanian language possibly related to (or part of) Celtic or Ligurian or Italic. Grouping Further information: Language families v d eHypothetical Indo-European phylogenetic clades Daco-Thracian Graeco-Aryan Graeco-Armenian Italo-Celtic Thraco-Illyrian Indo-Hittite Membership of these languages in the Indo-European language family is determined by genetic relationships meaning that all members are presumed to be descendants of a common ancestor Proto-Indo-European. Membership in the various branches groups and subgroups or Indo-European is also genetic but here the defining factors are shared innovations among various languages suggesting a common ancestor that split off from other Indo-European groups. For example what makes the Germanic languages a branch of Indo-European is that much of their structure and phonology can so be stated in rules that apply to all of them. Many of their common features are presumed to be innovations that took place in Proto-Germanic the source of all the Germanic languages. Tree versus wave model See also: Language change To the evolutionary history of a language family a genetic "tree model" is considered appropriate especially if communities do not remain in effective contact as their languages diverge. Exempted from this concept are shared innovations acquired by borrowing (or other means of convergence) that cannot be considered genetic. In this case the so-called "wave model" applies featuring borrowings and no clear underlying genetic tree. It has been asserted for example that many of the more striking features shared by Italic languages (Latin Oscan Umbrian etc.) might well be areal features. More certainly very similar-looking alterations in the systems of long vowels in the West Germanic languages greatly postdate any possible notion of a proto-language innovation (and cannot readily be regarded as "areal" either since English and continental West Germanic were not a linguistic area). In a similar vein there are many similar innovations in Germanic and Balto-Slavic that are far more likely to be areal features than traceable to a common proto-language such as the uniform development of a high vowel (*u in the case of Germanic *i/u in the case of Baltic and Slavic) before the PIE syllabic resonants ** * * unique to these two groups among IE languages which is in agreement with the wave model. The Balkan sprachbund even features areal convergence among members of very different branches. Using an extension to the Ringe-Warnow model of language evolution early IE was confirmed to have featured limited contact between distinct lineages while only the Germanic subfamily exhibited a less treelike behaviour as it acquired some characteristics from neighbours early in its evolution rather than from its direct ancestors. The internal diversification of especially West Germanic is cited to have been radically non-treelike.16 Proposed subgroupings Specialists have postulated the existence of such subfamilies (subgroups) as Italo-Celtic Graeco-Armenian Graeco-Aryan and Germanic with Balto-Slavic. The vogue for such subgroups waxes and wanes; Italo-Celtic for example used to be a standard subgroup of Indo-European but it is now little honored in part because much of the evidence on which it was based has turned out to have been misinterpreted.17 Subgroupings of the Indo-European languages are commonly held to reflect genetic relationships and linguistic change. The generic differentiation of Proto-Indo-European into dialects and languages happened hand in hand with language contact and the spread of innovations over different territories. Rather than being entirely genetic the grouping of satem languages is commonly inferred as an innovative change that occurred just once and subsequently spread over a large cohesive territory or PIE continuum that affected all but the peripheral areas.18 For instance Kortlandt proposes this satemization process involved interaction between a western and central Indo-European sphere of influence to the ancestors of Balts and Slavs.19 Shared features of Phrygian and Greek20 and of Thracian and Armenian21 group together with the Indo-Iranian family of Indo-European languages.22 Some fundamental shared features like the aorist (a verb form denoting action without reference to duration or completion) having the perfect active particle -s fixed to the stem link this group closer to Anatolian languages23 and Tocharian. Shared features with Balto-Slavic languages on the other hand (especially present and preterit formations) might be due to later contacts.24 The Indo-Hittite hypothesis proposes the Indo-European language family to consist of two main branches: one represented by the Anatolian languages and another branch encompassing all other Indo-European languages. Features that separate Anatolian from all other branches of Indo-European (such as the gender or the verb system) have been interpreted alternately as archaic debris or as innovations due to prolonged isolation. Points proffered in favour of the Indo-Hittite hypothesis are the (non-universal) Indo-European agricultural terminology in Anatolia25 and the preservation of laryngeals.26 However in general this hypothesis is considered to attribute too much weight to the Anatolian evidence. According to another view the Anatolian subgroup left the Indo-European parent language comparatively late approximately at the same time as Indo-Iranian and later than the Greek or Armenian divisions. A third view especially prevalent in the so-called French school of Indo-European studies holds that extant similarities in non-satem languages in general - including Anatolian - might be due to their peripheral location in the Indo-European language area and early separation rather than indicating a special ancestral relationship.27 Hans J. Holm based on lexical calculations arrives at a picture roughly replicating the general scholarly opinion and refuting the Indo-Hittite hypothesis.28 Satem and centum languages Main article: Centum-Satem isogloss The division of the Indo-European languages into a Satem vs. a Centum group was devised by von Bradke in the late 19th century and is said by somewho to be outdated because of being based on just one phonological feature. Suggested macrofamilies Some linguists propose that Indo-European languages form part of a hypothetical Nostratic macrofamily and attempt to relate Indo-European to other language families such as South Caucasian languages Uralic languages (the Indo-Uralic proposal) Dravidian languages and Afroasiatic languages. This theory like the similar Eurasiatic theory of Joseph Greenberg and the Proto-Pontic postulation of John Colarusso remains highly controversial however and is not accepted by most linguists in the field. Objections to such groupings are not based on any theoretical claim about the likely historical existence or non-existence of such macrofamilies; it is entirely reasonable to suppose that they might have existed. The serious difficulty lies in identifying the details of actual relationships between language families; it is very hard to find concrete evidence that transcends chance resemblance or is not equally likely explained as being due to borrowing (including Wanderwrter which can travel very long distances). Since the signal-to-noise ratio in historical linguistics declines steadily over time at great enough time-depths it becomes open to reasonable doubt that it can even be possible to distinguish between signal and noise. Evolution Proto-Indo-European Main article: Proto-Indo-European language The Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) is the common ancestor of the Indo-European languages spoken by the Proto-Indo-Europeans. From the 1960s knowledge of Anatolian became certain enough to establish its relationship to PIE. Using the method of internal reconstruction an earlier stage called Pre-Proto-Indo-European has been proposed. PIE was an inflected language in which the grammatical relationships between words were signaled through inflectional morphemes (usually endings). The roots of PIE are basic morphemes carrying a lexical meaning. By addition of suffixes they form stems and by addition of desinences (usually endings) these form grammatically inflected words (nouns or verbs). The hypothetical Indo-European verb system is complex and like the noun exhibits a system of ablaut. Diversification This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2008) The diversification of the parent language into the attested branches of daughter languages is historically unattested. The timeline of the evolution of the various daughter languages on the other hand is mostly undisputed quite regardless of the question of Indo-European origins. mid 2nd millennium BC distribution mid 1st millennium BC distribution post- Roman Empire and Migrations period distribution 2500 BC2000 BC: The breakup into the proto-languages of the attested dialects is complete. Proto-Greek is spoken in the Balkans Proto-Indo-Iranian north of the Caspian in the emerging Andronovo culture. The Bronze Age reaches Central Europe with the Beaker culture likely composed of various Centum dialects. The Tarim mummies possibly correspond to proto-Tocharians. 2000 BC1500 BC: Catacomb culture north of the Black Sea. The chariot is invented leading to the split and rapid spread of Iranian and Indo-Aryan from the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex over much of Central Asia Northern India Iran and Eastern Anatolia. Proto-Anatolian is split into Hittite and Luwian. The pre-Proto-Celtic Unetice culture has an active metal industry (Nebra skydisk). 1500 BC1000 BC: The Nordic Bronze Age develops pre-Proto-Germanic and the (pre)-Proto-Celtic Urnfield and Hallstatt cultures emerge in Central Europe introducing the Iron Age. Migration of the Proto-Italic speakers into the Italian peninsula (Bagnolo stele). Redaction of the Rigveda and rise of the Vedic civilization in the Punjab. The Mycenaean civilization gives way to the Greek Dark Ages. 1000 BC500 BC: The Celtic languages spread over Central and Western Europe. Baltic languages are spoken in a huge area from present-day Poland to the Ural Mountains.29 Proto Germanic. Homer and the beginning of Classical Antiquity. The Vedic Civilization gives way to the Mahajanapadas. Siddhartha Gautama attains enlightenment and preaches Buddhism. Zoroaster composes the Gathas rise of the Achaemenid Empire replacing the Elamites and Babylonia. Separation of Proto-Italic into Osco-Umbrian and Latin-Faliscan. Genesis of the Greek and Old Italic alphabets. A variety of Paleo-Balkan languages are spoken in Southern Europe. 500 BC1 BC/AD: Classical Antiquity: spread of Greek and Latin throughout the Mediterranean and during the Hellenistic period (Indo-Greeks) to Central Asia and the Hindukush. Kushan Empire Mauryan Empire. Proto-Germanic. The Anatolian languages are extinct. 1 BC/AD 500: Late Antiquity Gupta period; attestation of Armenian. Proto-Slavic. The Roman Empire and then the Migration period marginalize the Celtic languages to the British Isles. 5001000: Early Middle Ages. The Viking Age forms an Old Norse koine spanning Scandinavia the British Isles and Iceland. The Islamic conquest and the Turkic expansion results in the Arabization and Turkification of significant areas where Indo-European languages were spoken. Tocharian is extinct in the course of the Turkic expansion while Northeastern Iranian (Scytho-Sarmatian) is reduced to small refugia. 10001500: Late Middle Ages: Attestation of Albanian and Baltic languages. 15002000: Early Modern period to present: Colonialism results in the spread of Indo-European languages to every continent most notably Romance (North Central and South America French Canada North and Sub-Saharan Africa West Asia) West Germanic (English in North America Sub-Saharan Africa East Asia and Australia; to a lesser extent Dutch and German) and Russian to Central Asia and North Asia. Sound changes Main article: Indo-European sound laws As the Proto-Indo-European language broke up its sound system diverged as well changing according to various sound laws evidenced in the daughter languages. Notable cases of such sound laws include Grimm's law in Proto-Germanic loss of prevocalic *p- in Proto-Celtic loss of intervocalic *s- in Proto-Greek Brugmann's law in Proto-Indo-Iranian as well as satemization (discussed above). Grassmann's law and Bartholomae's law may or may not have operated at the common Indo-European stage. Comparison of conjugations The following table presents a comparison of conjugations of the thematic present indicative of the verbal root *ber- of the English verb to bear and its reflexes in various early attested IE languages and their modern descendants or relatives showing that all languages had in the early stage an inflectional verb system. Proto-Indo-European (*ber- 'to carry') I (1st. Sg.) *broh You (2nd. Sg.) *bresi He/She/It (3rd. Sg.) *breti We (1st. Du.) *browos You (2nd. Du.) *brethes They (3rd. Du.) *bretes We (1st. Pl.) *bromos You (2nd. Pl.) *brete They (3rd. Pl.) *bronti Major Subgroup Hellenic Indo-Iranian Italic Celtic Armenian Germanic Balto-Slavic Albanian Indo-Aryan Iranian Baltic Slavic Ancient Representative Ancient Greek Vedic Sanskrit Avestan Latin Old Irish Classical Arm. Gothic Old Prussian Old Church Sl. Old Albanian I (1st. Sg.) phr bhrmi fer biru; berim berem bara /bra/ ber You (2nd. Sg.) phreis bhrasi fers biri; berir beres baris berei He/She/It (3rd. Sg.) phrei bhrati fert berid ber bari beret We (1st. Du.) bhrvas baros berev You (2nd. Du.) phreton bhrathas barats bereta They (3rd. Du.) phreton bhratas berete We (1st. Pl.) phromen bhrmas ferimus bermai beremk baram berem You (2nd. Pl.) phrete bhratha fertis beirthe berk bari berete They (3rd. Pl.) phrousi bhranti ferunt berait beren barand bert Modern Representative Modern Greek Hindi-Urdu Persian French Irish Armenian (Eastern; Western) German Lithuanian Czech Albanian I (1st. Sg.) frno (mai) bhar (mi)baram (je) confre beirim berum em; g'perem (ich) gebre beru (un) mbart You (2nd. Sg.) frnis (t) bhare (mi)bari (tu) confres beirir berum es; g'peres (du) gebierst bere (ti) mbart He/She/It (3rd. Sg.) frni (vah) bhare (mi)barad (il) confre beireann; %beiridh berum ; g'per (sie) gebiert bere (ai/ajo) mbart We (1st. Pl.) frnoume (ham) bhare (mi)barim (nous) conferons beirimid; beiream berum enk; g'perenk (wir) gebren berem(e) (ne) mbartim You (2nd. Pl.) frnete (tum) bharo (mi)barid (vous) conferez beireann sibh; %beirthaoi berum ek; g'perek (ihr) gebrt berete (ju) mbartni They (3rd. Pl.) frnoun (ve) bhare (mi)barand (ils) confrent beirid berum en; g'peren (sie) gebren berou (ata/ato) mbartin While similarities are still visible between the modern descendants and relatives of these ancient languages the differences have increased over time. Some IE languages have moved from synthetic verb systems to largely periphrastic systems. The pronouns of periphrastic forms are in brackets when they appear. Some of these verbs have undergone a change in meaning as well. In Modern Irish beir usually only carries the meaning to bear in the sense of bearing a child its common meanings are to catch grab. The Hindi verb bharn the continuation of the Sanskrit verb can have a variety of meanings but the most common is "to fill". The forms given in the table although etymologically derived from the present indicative now have the meaning of subjunctive. The present indicative is conjugated periphrastically using a participle (etymologically the Sanskrit present participle bharant-) and an auxiliary: mai bhart h t bhart hai vah bhart hai ham bharte hai tum bharte ho ve bharte hai (masculine forms). German is not directly descended from Gothic but the Gothic forms are a close approximation of what the early West Germanic forms of c. 400 AD would have looked like. The cognate of Germanic beranan (English bear) survives in German only in the compound gebren meaning "bear (a child)". The Latin verb ferre is irregular and not a good representative of a normal thematic verb. In French other verbs now mean "to carry" and ferre only survives in compounds such as souffrir "to suffer" (from Latin sub- and ferre) and conferer "to confer" (from Latin "con-" and "ferre). In Modern Greek phero (modern transliteration fero) "to bear" is still used but only in specific contexts not in everyday language. The form that is (very) common today is pherno (modern transliteration ferno) meaning "to bring". Additionally the perfective form of pherno (used for the subjunctive voice and also for the future tense) is also phero. In Modern Russian (brat) carries the meaning to take. (bremia) means burden as something heavy to bear and derivative (beremennost) means pregnancy. Comparison of cognates Main article: Indo-European vocabulary This section requires expansion. See also Grammatical conjugation The Horse The Wheel and Language (book) Indo-European copula Indo-European sound laws Indo-European studies Indo-European vocabulary Language family List of Indo-European languages Proto-Indo-European language Proto-Indo-European root Citations and notes Joseph Wright. Gothic Grammar section 1. Karl Brugmann. Elements of the comparative grammar of the Indo-Germanic languages Volume 1. A. T. Robertson. A short grammar of the Greek New Testament page 86: Cases. It includes 449 languages and dialects according to the 2005 Ethnologue estimate about half (219) belonging to the Indo-Aryan subbranch. "Ethnologue list of language families". Ethnologue.com. http://www.ethnologue.com/ethnodocs/distribution.aspbyfamily. Retrieved 2010-08-07.  "Ethnologue list of languages by number of speakers". Ethnologue.com. http://www.ethnologue.com/ethnodocs/distribution.aspbysize. Retrieved 2010-08-07.  a b c Auroux Sylvain (2000). History of the Language Sciences. Berlin New York: Walter de Gruyter. p. 1156. ISBN 3110167352. http://books.google.com/idyasNy365EywC&pgPA1156&vqstephens+sassetti&dq3110167352.  M. V. Lomonosov. In: Complete Edition Moscow 1952 vol. 7 pp 652659: . ... ! ! . . . ! Imagine the depth of time when these languages separated! ... Polish and Russian separated so long ago! Now think how long ago this happened to Kurlandic! Think when this happened to Latin Greek German and Russian! Oh great antiquity! "cited on page 14-15." (PDF). http://www.billposer.org/Papers/iephm.pdf. Retrieved 2010-08-07.  Roger Blench Archaeology and Language: methods and issues. In: A Companion To Archaeology. J. Bintliff ed. 52-74. Oxford: Basil Blackwell 2004. (He erroneously included Egyptian Japanese and Chinese in the Indo-European languages while omitting Hindi.) In London Quarterly Review X/2 1813.; cf. Szemernyi 1999:12 footnote 6 In German it is indogermanisch 'Indo-Germanic' which indicates the east-west extension. That term was first recorded in use in French original as indo-germanique in 1810 by Conrad Malte-Brun a French geographer of Danish descent. such as Schleicher 1861 Szemernyi 1957 Collinge 1985 and Beekes 1995 Of the Albanian Language - William Martin Leake London 1814. "The Thracian language". The Linguist List. http://linguistlist.org/forms/langs/LLDescription.cfmcodetxh. Retrieved 2008-01-27. "An ancient language of Southern Balkans belonging to the Satem group of Indo-European. This language is the most likely ancestor of modern Albanian (which is also a Satem language) though the evidence is scanty. 1st Millennium BC - 500 AD."  Nakhleh Luay; Ringe Don; Warnow Tandy (2005). "Perfect Phylogenetic Networks: A New Methodology for Reconstructing the Evolutionary History of Natural Languages". Language: Journal of the Linguistic Society of America 81 (2): 382420. doi:10.1353/lan.2005.0078. http://www.cs.rice.edu/nakhleh/Papers/NRWlanguage.pdf  Mallory J.P. D. Q. Adams (Hrsg.): Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture Fitzroy Dearborn London 1997 Britannica 15th edition vol.22 1981 p.588 594 "Frederik Kortlandt-The spread of the Indo-Europeans 1989" (PDF). http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art111e.pdf. Retrieved 2010-08-07.  Lubotsky - The Old Phrygian Areyastis-inscription Kadmos 27 9-26 1988 Kortlandt - The Thraco-Armenian consonant shift Linguistique Balkanique 31 71-74 1988 Renfrew Colin (1987). Archaeology & Language. The Puzzle of the Indo-European Origins. London: Jonathan Cape. ISBN 0-224-02495-7.  Encyclopaedia Britannica vol.22 Helen Hemingway Benton Publisher Chicago (15th ed.) 1981 p.593 George S. Lane Douglas Q. Adams Britannica 15th edition 22:667 "The Tocharian problem" The supposed autochthony of Hittites the Indo-Hittite hypothesis and migration of agricultural "Indo-European" societies became intrinsically linked together by C. Renfrew. (Renfrew C 2001a The Anatolian origins of Proto-Indo-European and the autochthony of the Hittites. In R. Drews ed. Greater Anatolia and the Indo-Hittite language. family: 36-63. Washington DC: Institute for the Study of Man). Britannica 15th edition 22 p. 586 "Indo-European languages The parent language Laryngeal theory" - W.C.; p. 589 593 "Anatolian languages" - Philo H.J. Houwink ten Cate H. Craig Melchert and Theo P.J. van den Hout Britannica 15th edition 22 p. 594 "Indo-Hittite hypothesis" Holm Hans J. (2008). "The Distribution of Data in Word Lists and its Impact on the Subgrouping of Languages". In Preisach Christine; Burkhardt Hans; Schmidt-Thieme Lars et al.. Data Analysis Machine Learning and Applications. Proc. of the 31st Annual Conference of the German Classification Society (GfKl) University of Freiburg March 79 2007. Studies in Classification Data Analysis and Knowledge Organization. Heidelberg-Berlin: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 9783540782391. http://www.hjholm.de/. "The result is a partly new chain of separation for the main Indo-European branches which fits well to the grammatical facts as well as to the geographical distribution of these branches. In particular it clearly demonstrates that the Anatolian languages did not part as first ones and thereby refutes the Indo-Hittite hypothesis."  "Indo-European Languages: Balto-Slavic Family". Utexas.edu. 2008-11-10. http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/iedocctr/ie-lg/Balto-Slavic.html. Retrieved 2010-08-07.  References Anthony David W. (2007). The Horse the Wheel and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691058873. http://books.google.com/booksidrOG5VcYxhiEC&dq.  Auroux Sylvain (2000). History of the Language Sciences. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 3110167352 . Fortson Benjamin W. (2004). Indo-European Language and Culture: An Introduction. Malden Massachusetts: Blackwell. ISBN 1405103159.  Houwink ten Cate H. J.; Melchert H. Craig & van den Hout Theo P. J. (1981). "Indo-European languages The parent language Laryngeal theory". Encyclopdia Britannica. 22 (15th ed.). Chicago: Helen Hemingway Benton . Holm Hans J. (2008). "The Distribution of Data in Word Lists and its Impact on the Subgrouping of Languages". In Preisach Christine; Burkhardt Hans; Schmidt-Thieme Lars et al.. Data Analysis Machine Learning and Applications. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the German Classification Society (GfKl) University of Freiburg March 79 2007. Heidelberg-Berlin: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 9783540782391 . Kortlandt Frederik (1990). "The Spread of the Indo-Europeans". Journal of Indo-European Studies 18 (12): 131140 . Lubotsky A. (1988). "The Old Phrygian Areyastis-inscription". Kadmos 27: 926 . Kortlandt Frederik (1988). "The Thraco-Armenian consonant shift". Linguistique Balkanique 31: 7174 . Lane George S.; Adams Douglas Q. (1981). "The Tocharian problem". Encyclopdia Britannica. 22 (15th ed.). Chicago: Helen Hemingway Benton . Renfrew C. (2001). "The Anatolian origins of Proto-Indo-European and the autochthony of the Hittites". In Drews R.. Greater Anatolia and the Indo-Hittite language family. Washington DC: Institute for the Study of Man. ISBN 0941694771 . Szemernyi Oswald; Jones David; Jones Irene (1999). Introduction to Indo-European Linguistics. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198238703  Further reading Beekes Robert S. P. (1995). Comparative Indo-European Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.  Chakrabarti Byomkes (1994). A comparative study of Santali and Bengali. Calcutta: K.P. Bagchi & Co.. ISBN 8170741289.  Collinge N. E. (1985). The Laws of Indo-European. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.  Mallory J.P. (1989). In Search of the Indo-Europeans. London: Thames and Hudson. ISBN 0-500-27616-1.  Renfrew Colin (1987). Archaeology & Language. The Puzzle of the Indo-European Origins. London: Jonathan Cape. ISBN 0-224-02495-7.  Meillet Antoine. Esquisse dune grammaire compare de larmnien classique 1903. Ramat Paolo; Ramat Anna Giacalone (1998). The Indo-European languages. Routledge.  Schleicher August A Compendium of the Comparative Grammar of the Indo-European Languages (1861/62). Strazny Philip (Ed). (2000). Dictionary of Historical and Comparative Linguistics (1 ed.). Routledge. ISBN 978-1579582180.  Szemernyi Oswald (1957). "The problem of Balto-Slav unity". Kratylos 2: 97123.  Watkins Calvert (2000). The American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European Roots. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0-618-08250-6.  Remys Edmund General distinguishing features of various Indo-European languages and their relationship to Lithuanian. Berlin New York: Indogermanische Forschungen Vol. 112 2007. P. Chantraine (1968) Dictionnaire tymologique de la langue grecque Klincksieck Paris. External links Databases Dyen Isidore; Kruskal Joseph; Black Paul (1997). "Comparative Indo-European". wordgumbo. http://www.wordgumbo.com/ie/cmp/. Retrieved 13 December 2009.  "Indo-European". LLOW Languages of the World. http://languageserver.uni-graz.at/ls/groupid4. Retrieved 14 December 2009.  "Indo-European Documentation Center". Linguistics Research Center University of Texas at Austin. 2009. http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/iedocctr/ie.html. Retrieved 14 December 2009.  Lewis M. Paul ed (2009). "Language Family Trees: Indo-European". Ethnologue: Languages of the World Online version (Sixteenth ed.). Dallas Tex.: SIL International. http://www.ethnologue.com/showfamily.aspsubid2-16 . "The Linguist List Multitree Portal for Indo-European". Eastern Michigan University. 19892007. http://multitree.org/codes/ieur. Retrieved 14 December 2009.  "Thesaurus Indogermanischer Text- und Sprachmaterialien: TITUS" (in German). TITUS University of Frankfurt. 2003. http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/indexe.htm. Retrieved 13 December 2009.  Lexica "Indo-European Etymological Dictionary (IEED)". Leiden Netherlands: Department of Comparative Indo-European Linguistics Leiden University. http://www.indoeuropean.nl. Retrieved 14 December 2009.  "Indo-European Roots Index". The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (Fourth ed.). Internet Archive: Wayback Machine. August 22 2008 2000. http://web.archive.org/web/20080726143746/www.bartleby.com/61/IEroots.html. Retrieved 9 December 2009.  Kbler Gerhard (2000). "Indogermanisches Wrterbuch" (in German). Gerhard Kbler. http://www.koeblergerhard.de/idgwbhin.html. Retrieved 14 December 2009.  Schalin Johan (2009). "Lexicon of Early Indo-European Loanwords Preserved in Finnish". Johan Schalin. http://www.iki.fi/jschalin/cat10. Retrieved 9 December 2009.  v d eList of primary demonstrated language families Africa Afro-Asiatic  Austronesian  Kadu  Khoe  Koman  Kx'a  Mande  Niger-Congo  Nilo-Saharan  Songhay  Tuu  Ubangian Isolates Gumuz  Hadza  Sandawe Europe and Asia Abkhaz-Adygean  Afro-Asiatic  Ainu  Austro-Asiatic  Austronesian  Chukotko-Kamchatkan  Dene-Yeniseian  Dravidian  Eskimo-Aleut  Great Andamanese  Hmong-Mien  Hurro-Urartian  Indo-European  Japonic  Kartvelian  Kradai  Mongolic  Nakho-Dagestanian  Ongan  Sino-Tibetan  Tungusic  Turkic  Tyrsenian  Uralic  Yukaghir  Altaic Isolates Basque  Burushaski  Elamite  Korean  Kusunda  Nihali  Nivkh  Sumerian Sign Languages British Sign  French Sign  German Sign  Japanese Sign  Swedish Sign  Chinese Sign  Indian Sign  Other sign languages New Guinea and the Pacific Amto-Musan  Austronesian  Baining  Bayono-Awbono  Border (Tami)  Central Solomons  East Bird's HeadSentani  East Geelvink Bay  Eastern Trans-Fly  Fas  Kwomtari  Lakes Plain  Left May  Lower Mamberamo  Mairasi  Nimboran  North Bougainville  Piawi  RamuLower Sepik  Senagi  Sepik  Skou  South Bougainville  South-Central Papuan  Tor-Kwerba  Torricelli  TransNew Guinea  West Papuan  Yawa  Yuat YeleWest New Britain Isolates Abinomn  Busa  Kol  Kuot  Pyu  Taiap  Yal  Yuri  Isirawa  Massep  Sulka Australia Bunuban  Burarran  Daly  Giimbiyu (Mangerrian)  Gunwinyguan  Iwaidjan  Jarrakan  Limilngan  Mirndi  Nyulnyulan  Pama-Nyungan  Tankic  Tasmanian  Worrorran. Isolates Enindhilyagwa  Gaagudju  Laragiya  Ngurmbur  Tiwi  Umbugarla North America Algic  Alsean  Caddoan  Chimakuan  Chinookan  Chumashan  Comecrudan  Coosan  Dene-Yeniseian  Eskimo-Aleut  Iroquoian  Kalapuyan  Keresan  Kiowa-Tanoan  Maiduan  Muskogean  Palaihnihan  Plateau Penutian  Pomoan  Salishan  Shastan  Siouan-Catawban  Tsimshianic  Utian  Uto-Aztecan  Wakashan  Wintuan  Yokutsan  Yuman  Yuki-Wappo Isolates Chimariko  Haida  Karuk  Kutenai  Siuslaw  Takelma  Timucua  Washo  Yana  Yuchi  Zuni Mesoamerica Chibchan  Mayan  Misumalpan  Mixe-Zoque  Oto-Manguean  Tequistlatecan  Totonacan  Uto-Aztecan  Totozoquean Isolates Cuitlatec  Huave  Lenca  Seri  P'urhepecha  Tol  Xinca South America Alacalufan  Arawakan  Arauan  Araucanian  Arutani-Sape  Aymaran  Barbacoan  Bororoan  Cahuapanan  Cariban  Catacaoan  Chapacuran   Charruan  Chibchan  Choco  Chon  Guaicuruan  Guajiboan  J (G)  Harakmbut  Jirajaran  Jivaroan  Kariri  Katembri-Taruma  Katukinan  Mascoian  Matacoan  Maxakalian  Muran  Nadahup   Nambikwaran  Otomkoan  Pano-Tacanan  Peba-Yaguan  Purian  Quechuan  Saliban  Tiniguan  Tucanoan  Tupian  Uru-Chipaya  Witotoan  Yabutian  Yanomaman  Zamucoan  Zaparoan  Chimuan  Esmeralda-Yaruro  Hibito-Choln  Lule-Vilela  Macro-G  Tequiraca-Canichana Isolates (extant in 2000) Aikana  Andoque  Camsa  Candoshi  Cofan  Fulni  Joti  Huaorani  Irantxe  Itonama  Leco  Mku  Movima  Nukak  Puinave  Ticuna  Trumai  Warao  Yamana  Yuracare See also Language isolates  Unclassified languages  Creoles  Pidgins  Mixed languages  Artificial languages  Sign languages Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Indo-European languages