Indo-European Linguistics

Paper read at the 1st International Colloquium of Societas Celto-Slavica held in Coleraine on 20 June 2005, and published in Parallels between Celtic and Slavic, Studia Celto-Slavica 1, Proceedings volume of the conference. The paper examines the contribution of Slavic and Western scholars to the question of correspondences between the traditions of early India and those of the Celtic-speaking peoples. While the emphasis is primarily on kingship, religious, sacral and lexicographic parallels are also examined.

This table began as a comparison of Etruscan words to other Indo-European words, and it is clear that the linkage to Etruscan illuminates some new patterns in Indo-European word relationships. We added for further comparison words from the Baltic group (Latvian), Kartvelian (Georgian) and Uralic (Finnish) and Basque, a "language isolate" that looks as much Indo-European as othes in the Indo-European group. For those who advocate Hurrian connections Hurrian words that are available have been added to the table.  *PIE specialists have been speculating on the idea that the three language families, Baltic, Uralic and Kartvelian may be related to Indo-European, perhaps as a super family.
  The Indo-European family of languages is believed to have originated north of the Black Sea (Pontic Region). Some scholars have indicated a Caucasus origin. Although we can't rule out borrowing among [unrelated] languages it appears from the interesting shifts that the languages in our "Indo-European Table may be one family. I found šāl-a, šali, šala (Hurrian)
ასული, asuli, daughter(Georgian); თვით, t’vit’, self (Georgian), sevi, self (Latvian), vete, (Albanian); ხუთი, khut’i, five (Georgian), пяць, piać (Belarussian), pieci (Latvian), pesë (Albanian), pente (Greek) and pajncha (Sanskrit) interesting. (The interesting relationships continue through the table. The table is alphabetically arranged via the right-hand column, Etruscan words.

This article proposes a new formal reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) nouns containing the suffix *–oi–. I argue that both primary and non-primary derivatives in this class had stress alternating between the derivational suffix and the following inflectional ending (e.g., ACC.SG *[-óy-ṃ] vs. GEN *[-y-ós]) rather than the "amphikinetic" alternation between root and inflectional ending (ACC.SG *[´-oy-ṃ] vs. GEN *[-y-ós]) that is traditionally assumed for all primary nominals with suffixal *[o]-vocalism under the widely accepted “Erlangen Model” (Schindler 1975a,b, Rix 1992) of Indo-European morphophonology. Support for this alternative reconstruction comes from Hittite, which confirms that the suffixal stress seen in the Greek reflex of this noun class was inherited from PIE rather than root stress as in Vedic Sanskrit. More broadly, I contend that an adequate account of the prosodic behavior of PIE *–oi-stems requires (i) abandoning the traditional connection between suffixal *[o]-grade and "amphikinetic" word stress; and (ii) adopting a framework (such as the one articulated by Kiparsky 2010) in which the suffix's capacity to attract stress in both primary and non-primary derivation can be modeled in a unified way.

There have been numerous attempts to find relatives of Proto-Indo-European, not the least of which is the Indo-Uralic Hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Uralic are alleged to descend from a common ancestor. However, attempts to prove this hypothesis have run into numerous difficulties. One difficulty concerns the inability to reconstruct the ancestral morphological system in detail, and another concerns the rather small shared vocabulary. This latter problem is further complicated by the fact that many scholars think in terms of borrowing rather than inheritance. Moreover, the lack of agreement in vocabulary affects the ability to establish viable sound correspondences and rules of combinability. This paper will attempt to show that these and other difficulties are caused, at least in large part, by the question of the origins of the Indo-European parent language. Evidence will be presented to demonstrate that Proto-Indo-European is the result of the imposition of a Eurasiatic language-to use Greenberg's term-on a population speaking one or more primordial Northwest Caucasian languages.

The present article offers a critical analysis of Reiner Lipp’s hypothesis,
according to which the Proto-Iranian stage of the development of Indo-
European palatals *k̂, *ĝ and *ĝh, represented as the sibilants s and z in
Common Iranian and as ϑ and d in Old Persian, should be reconstructed
as the affricates *͜ts and *͜dz respectively. Since the only positive evidence for this theory is provided by the earliest putative borrowings from Iranian into Armenian (arcatʿ ‘silver’) and Tocharian B (tsain ‘arrow’ and tsaiññe ‘ornament’), an objective analysis of these loanwords is needed in order to adequately assessm the Proto-Iranian primary affricate hypothesis.

Example words or sentences illustrating the application of sūtras are given in italics •~ indicates optional expressions • Mistakes in Sharma et al. (1969) have been corrected and are indicated with a superscript plus sign + [#119] dvitīyādhyāyasya dvitīyaḥ pādaḥ pūrvāparādharottaram ekadeśinaikādhikaraṇe || 2.2.1 || ekadeśo 'syāsti ity ekadeśī, avayavī, tadvācinā subantena saha pūrva apara adhara uttara ity ete śabdāḥ sāmarthyād ekadeśavacanāḥ samasyante, tatpuruṣaś ca samāso bhavati / ekādhikaraṇagrahaṇam ekadeśino viśeṣaṇam / ekaṃ ced adhikaraṇam ekadravyam ekadeśi bhavati / ṣaṣṭhīsamāsāpavādo 'yaṃ yogaḥ / pūrvaṃ kāyasya pūrvakāyaḥ / aparakāyaḥ / adharakāyaḥ / uttarakāyaḥ / ekadeśinā iti kim? pūrvaṃ nābheḥ kāyasya / ekādhikaraṇe iti kim? pūrvaṃ chātrāṇām āmantraya / kathaṃ madhyāhnaḥ, sāyāhnaḥ iti? "saṅkhyāvisāyapūrvasyāhnasyāhann anyatarasyāṃ ṅau" (6.3.110) iti jñāpakāt sarveṇaikadeśaśabdenāhnaḥ samāso bhavati // ____________________________________________________________________ ardhaṃ napuṃsakam || 2.2.2 || ekadeśinā ekādhikaraṇe iti vartate / samapravibhāge 'rdhaśabdo napuṃsakam āviṣṭaliṅgaḥ, tasyedaṃ grahaṇam / ardham ity etad napuṃsakam ekadeśinaikādhikaraṇena samasyate, tatpuruṣaś ca samāso bhavati / ṣaṣṭhīsamāsāpavādo 'yaṃ yogaḥ / ardhaṃ pippalyāḥ ardhapippalī / ardhakośātakī / napuṃsakam iti kim? grāmārdhaḥ / nagarārdhaḥ / ekadeśinā ity eva, ardhaṃ paśor devadattasya / devadattena saha samāso na bhavati / ekādhikaraṇe ity eva, ardhaṃ pippalīnām // ____________________________________________________________________ dvitīyatṛtīyacaturthaturyāṇy anyatarasyām || 2.2.3 || ekadeśinā ekādhikaraṇe iti vartate / ṣasṭhīsamāsāpavādo 'yaṃ yogaḥ / anyatarasyāṃ grahaṇāt so 'pi ṣaṣṭhīsamāso bhavati / "pūraṇaguṇa" (2.2.11) iti pratiṣedhaś ca ata evānyatarasyāṃ grahaṇasāmarthyān na pravartate / dvitīyādīni śabdarūpāṇi ekadeśinaikādhikaraṇena sahānyatarasyāṃ samasyante, tatpuruṣaś ca samāso bhavati / dvitīyaṃ bhikṣāyāḥ dvitīyabhikṣā, ṣaṣṭhīsamāsapakṣe bhikṣādvitīyaṃ vā / tṛtīyaṃ bhikṣāyāḥ tṛtīyabhikṣā, bhikṣātṛtīyaṃ vā / caturthaṃ bhikṣāyāḥ caturthabhikṣā, bhikṣācaturthaṃ vā / turyaṃ bhikṣāyāḥ turyabhikṣā, bhikṣāturyaṃ vā / turīyaśabdasyāpīṣyate / turīyaṃ bhikṣāyāḥ turīyabhikṣā, bhikṣāturīyaṃ vā / ekadeśinā ity eva, dvitīyaṃ bhikṣāyā bhikṣukasya / ekādhikaraṇe ity eva, dvitīyaṃ bhikṣāṇām // ____________________________________________________________________ [#120] prāptāpanne ca dvitīyayā || 2.2.4 || ekadeśinaikādhikaraṇe (2.2.1) iti nivṛttam / dvitīyāsamāse (2.1.24) prāpte vacanam idam / samāsavidhānāt so 'pi bhavati / prāpta āpanna ity etau dvitīyāntena saha samasyete, tatpuruṣaś ca samāso bhavati / prāpto jīvikām prāptajīvikaḥ, jīvikāprāptaḥ iti vā / āpanno jīvikam āpannajīvikaḥ, jīvikāpannaḥ iti vā // ____________________________________________________________________ kālāḥ parimāṇinā || 2.2.5 ||

This article presents the history of the Latvian disjunctive conjunction jeb ‘or’ and analyzes its relationship with OLith. jeib ‘if’. Jeb as a disjunctive conjunction is a result of strictly Latvian development and originates from the concessive conditionals with two counterconditions in the protasis.

We have seen that several vedic seals are standards containing,vedic metrology,vedic geneology and proclamations by vedic kings.In this article we are identifying the Vedic King Divodasa and his relation to Varanasi/Kaasi and the Kumbha Mela of Prayaga.

This paper presents a spatio-temporal data mining regarding the origin of the names of the 218 longest European rivers. The study shows that 35.2% of these river names originate in the Near East and Southern Caucasus. The study also investigates the origin of European mountain names. It is shown that at least 26 mountain names originate from Africa.

Presentation at “The Way We Think: A Research Symposium on Conceptual Integration and the Nature and Origin of Cognitively Modern Humans.” University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Demark, August 19-23,  2002. Document includes Supplemental Materials: Resource Guide and Commentaries
In recent years the relationship between language change and biological evolution has captured the attention of investigators operating in different disciplines, particularly evolutionary biology, AI and A-Life (Zeimke 2001, Hull 2001), as well as linguistics (Croft 2000; Sinha 1999), with each group often bringing radically different conceptualizations of the object under study, namely, “language” itself, to the debate.  Over the centuries, meanings associated with the expression “language” have been influenced by mappings of conceptual frames and inputs from the biological sciences onto the entity referred to as “language”. At the same time the prestige of the “science of linguistics” created a feedback mechanism by which the referentiality of “language”, at each stage, was mapped back into the field of evolutionary biology along with the emergent structure(s) of the resulting “blend”. While significant energy has been spent on identifying ways in which biological evolution has been linked to concepts of language evolution (Dörries 2002), little attention has been directed to the nature of the conceptual integration networks that have been produced in the process. This paper examines the way conceptual integration theory can be brought to bear on the “blends” that have been created, focusing primarily on examples drawn from 19th century debates concerning the “language-species-organism analogy” in the emerging field of comparative-historical philology.

a cura di ROSA BIANCA FINAZZI e ALFREDO VALVO Atti del Seminario Nazionale di studio (Brescia, 14-15-16 ottobre 1999) Pensiero e istituzioni del mondo classico nelle culture del Vicino Oriente 1 C. De Meo, Lingue tecniche del latino, Bologna 19862, pp. 148 ss. 2 C. De Meo, op. cit., pp. 85 s.

This Excel file is a WORK IN PROGRESS on Indo-European basic lexicon, aligning PIE reconstructions from IEW, LIV and Mallory-Adams with intermediate reconstructions of IE sub-families found in several other sources (mainly Brill / Leiden etymological dictionaries): see dedicated sheet for details on sources.
Reconstructions with a green background have more complete data than those with a white background.
This DRAFT database is intended as a stepping stone for researchers who want to explore external genetic relationships between Indo-European languages and other language families.

Գիրքը հեղինակի՝ հայկական վիպական բանահյուսության վերաբերյալ մի շարք ուսումնասիրությունների ամբողջություն է, որը կարող է որոշակիորեն նոր պատկեր ստեղծել նյութի վերաբերյալ։ Քննվում են էպոսների հնագույն՝ առասպելաբանական շերտերը, նրանց հիման վրա էպոսի ձևավորման և զարգացման խնդիրները։ Ներկայացվում են բազում նոր հնդեվրոպական, հնագույն մերձարևելյան և կովկասյան կապեր, ցույց է տրվում հայկական էպոսների ծագումը միևնույն առասպելաբանական հիմքից, նոր հայացքով է դիտվում ողջ հայ վիպական բանահյուսությունը՝ ազգածին ավանդությունից մինչև խորհրդային «էպոս» և վիպական կերպարների ծագումն ու զարգացումը։ Նախատեսվում է մասնագետների, ուսանողների և ընթերցողների լայն շրջանակների համար։

Two tables: 1. Proto-Indo-European consonants and their reflexes in Elamite and other Indo-European languages, 2. Some of the most fundamental Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) words and roots, with their cognates in Elamite and other Indo-European languages.

The Dictionary of Indo-European Poetic and Religious Themes (DIEPART) was a desideratum in the field of comparative studies. Initiated by the founding father Adalbert Kuhn, Indo-European phraseology and poetics has been a constant subject of research, with a first synthesis in 1967 by Rüdiger Schmitt (Dichtung und Dichtersprache in indogermanischer Zeit, Wiesbaden), a seminal book by Calvert Watkins in 1995 (How to Kill a Dragon. Aspects of Indo-European Poetics, Oxford) and various important works by Enrico Campanile, Françoise Bader, M.L. West and some others.
Didier Calin has made a new synthesis in the form of a Dictionary, extremely practical in use, where he not only presents the existing results, but also brings the new discoveries he made with the help of the Anatolian languages and the Latvian folksongs, the dainas. A copious index verborum and index locorum enable the researchers to find quickly a text occurence and its translation.
The book is designed not only for comparatists or indo-europeanists but also for classicists and for the specialists of various branches who are interested in the deep history of their field.»
Didier CALIN, who lives in Riga, was trained in Germany in Indo-European philology. He has studied extensively the Latvian dainas (popular folksongs) which retain an extraordinary wealth of mythological motives of Indo-European age.
Can be ordered here : http://www.centchemins.com/

The Harappan seals contain several linguistic symbols which have not been properly understood so far.Through my works especially- Indus script decipherment breakthrough, PaNameTa-the troy tower weight  and measure system of Harappa, The Harappan Symbol Of 
Man+ Trident And Its Relation To Kausika Visvamitra  And The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower Weights), The Harappan Unicorn And The Kalinga Malla MeTas(Tower Weights) , The Harappan Symbol Of  Intersecting Circles And Its Relation  To Kausika Visvamitra And The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower  weights), The Harappan Contest Motif Of Nude Man With Six Locks Of Hair Fighting  Two Tigers And Its Relation To The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower Weights), The Harappan symbols of Roots, Nuts And Cocks And Their  Relation    To Kausika Visvamitra And The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower  weights), Identification Of KaNva In The Indus Script, Identification Of Troy In The Indus script,Identification Of Barley And Mustard In The Indus Script, Krishna’s Mathura And Dvaraka In The Indus Script, The Pinna In The Indus Script, The Identity Of Vedic Sarasvati And The Location Of Krishna’s Dvaraka, Identification Of Vedic Bharadvaja In The Indus  Script, Krishna’s Dvaraka  In The Indus Script, One Symbol  Of Indus Script Can Tell  A Lot About The Indus Valley Civilisation, The Identity Of Kasyapa In The Indus Valley And Sumeria, Kusa -The Son Of Rama-In Mesopotamia(Sumer),Indus -Sumer Trade, A Few “Copper” Names In The Indus Script, Janaka-King Of Mithila-In The Indus Script,The Vedic Asvins, Yama And Kartikeya In The Indus Script, The Goddess Sarasvati And The Origin Of Brahmi And Kharoshthi, The Origin Of The Roman Aes Grave From The Indus Valley Money, A Solution To The Mystery Of  The Gundestrup  Cauldron, The Eternal Soma Of The Vedas,              Vedic Roots Of Ancient Egyptian Religion, A Veiled Visvamitra Soma Sacrifice  In The New Testament , The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-1:The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-2,
The Punny Plough,The Bearded Kings Of The Ancient,
Bharata -The Language Of The Indus Valley Civilisation,
The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation -3,The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-4,Harappan Vedic Sacrificial Feasts In Mesopotamian Art And In The Bible,The Script of Indus valley Civilisation-6 :A Vrishni Silver Coin And Its Harappan Source,The Script of Indus valley Civilisation-7: The Conversion Of Makha(Sacrifice) To Tanka(Mint) In The Indus Script,Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-8:Vedic Root Of Gudea’s Akshayapatra,Three Men In A Boat Seal Evidence Of Indus –Dilmun Trade,The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-9: The Goodluck Symbols Of The Indus Script, The script of Indus valley civilisation-10:Identification Of The True Vedic Soma From Harappan Seals  Confirms The Indus Valley Civilisation As Vedic, The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-11:
Daksha (Soma) Yaaga-The Vedic Eucharist -In The Indus Script , The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-12:
Dāśarājñá And Dasaratha In The Indus Script, The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-13:The Silver Palm Seals Are Rosetta Stones Of The Indus Script , Vedic And Sumerian Linguistic Evidences For The Language Of Harappa, The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-14:The Difference Of Meluhha And Mlecca,
The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-15:The Shift Of The Capital Of The Vrishnis From Mathura( Kalibangan) To Dvaraka( Mohenjodaro), 6000 Year Old Mehrgarh Wheel Amulet Employs Vedic Script, The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-16:Vedic Sarasvati-Ganga Civilisation, The Identity Of The RigVedic Rivers, Mohenjo-daro-The City Of Krishna -

I have shown that several seals contain vedic metrological terms,names of vedic ornaments,names of people, places and gods etc. My perception is that only a comprehensive study of ancient vedic  metrology can decipher the script symbols satisfactorily. A significant find herein is the existence of the Kalinga malla mana system during Harappan times challenging  the common perception of its origin from the later  Kalinga kingdom(Orissa).The unicorn is identified as the pala/nishka/soma/agni.Signs of intersecting circles, fish , crab,bud,tower etc. also indicate pala.The six locks of hair indicate  the paNameTa weight of six barley grains.Roots  and nuts indicate viira bhadra/ Drupada/ varaha/pala.We have located Lord Krishna’s Mathura and Dvaraka in the Indus valley scripts.
We have confirmed Mohenjodaro as the first Dvaraka
on the basis of the inscription on the copperplate B7C2 from there and textual evidences from the Rgveda, Mahabharata etc.We have located PadmakuuTa,one of the
palaces of Krishna there.Also we have identified the Sindhu(Indus) as the Vedic Sarasvati river.We have gone through the symbols  identifying the Bharadvajas,the clan of composers of the earliest vedic texts.In Krishna’s Dvaraka we gathered more details from the script on Lord Krishna’s Dvaraka and Sindhu/Sarasvati. We have looked into the
indications of the Harappan jar symbol with three forks on each edge.We have located  the Kasyapas in Hastinapura
trading with Sumeria.We have decoded the Mari Standard,went deeper into the meanings of several Sumerian images and confirmed Meluhha as Vedic Harappa/Indus valley. We have located Janaka,the king of Mithila,father-in-law of Rama, in the Indus script.We have identified the names of copper in the Indus script and located  the Asvins,Yama and Skanda  in the Indus script.In A Model For Indus Script Decipherment
we have identified the deity in the seal M-1181 and built a model for complete decipherment of the Indus script.
We have seen how  Brahmi and Kharoshthi evolved from the Indus Script and how the Indus script was in use along with Brahmi/Kharoshthi even into the  first centuries CE.We have seen how the coins of the ancient world,including the Roman coins evolved from the Indus valley money.
We have looked for  and located a Rosetta Stone for the Indus script, in the varaha/gadyanaka coin form.
We have gone into the relation of the Druids to the Indus valley civilisation and the role of their  Gundestrup cauldron
in the evolution of Christianity.
We have explored the relation of the Anau seal to the Indus Valley Civilisation.
We have gone into the relationship of the Egyptian and Harappan deities.
We have looked into a beautiful story from the New Testament
invoving  the vedic soma sacrifice in A Veiled Visvamitra Soma Sacrifice In The New Testament.
We have studied  the indications of some of the Indus script symbols with particular reference to their use on ancient coins of India .
We have looked into symbolism of the overflowing vase on the Sumerian statue of Gudea and through it we identified the indications of several Indus symbols including the Harischandra vaajapeya sacrifice.
We have seen how the Harappan glyphs served as goodluck symbols .
The identification of the right vedic soma has two important
aspects:First, it ends the long quest for the mysterious soma. Second,it confirms the Indus valley civilisation as vedic ,beyond any doubt.
We have studied the vedic Daksha Yaaga  and its relation to the soma yaaga.Also we have located  Dāśarājñá and  Dasaratha in the Indus seals.
We have explored the application of the palm seals as further rosetta stones of the Indus script .
We have looked into the claim of mlecca as the language of the Indus valley civilation and concluded that Bharata,not mlecca, was the language of the Indus valley civilisation.
We have gone into the shift of the vedic Yadava clans from the Ghaggar-Hakra(Yamuna) to the Sarasvati(Sindhu) basin.
In another article we have confirmed the river Sindhu as the vedic river Sarasvati and Mohenjodaro as Krishna’s Dvaraka.
In this article we are going into a majestic bull seal.

The Harappan seals contain several linguistic symbols which have not been properly understood so far.Through my works especially- Indus script decipherment breakthrough, PaNameTa-the troy tower weight  and measure system of Harappa, The Harappan Symbol Of 
Man+ Trident And Its Relation To Kausika Visvamitra  And The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower Weights), The Harappan Unicorn And The Kalinga Malla MeTas(Tower Weights) , The Harappan Symbol Of  Intersecting Circles And Its Relation  To Kausika Visvamitra And The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower  weights), The Harappan Contest Motif Of Nude Man With Six Locks Of Hair Fighting  Two Tigers And Its Relation To The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower Weights), The Harappan symbols of Roots, Nuts And Cocks And Their  Relation    To Kausika Visvamitra And The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower  weights), Identification Of KaNva In The Indus Script, Identification Of Troy In The Indus script,Identification Of Barley And Mustard In The Indus Script, Krishna’s Mathura And Dvaraka In The Indus Script, The Pinna In The Indus Script, The Identity Of Vedic Sarasvati And The Location Of Krishna’s Dvaraka, Identification Of Vedic Bharadvaja In The Indus  Script, Krishna’s Dvaraka  In The Indus Script, One Symbol  Of Indus Script Can Tell  A Lot About The Indus Valley Civilisation, The Identity Of Kasyapa In The Indus Valley And Sumeria, Kusa -The Son Of Rama-In Mesopotamia(Sumer),Indus -Sumer Trade, A Few “Copper” Names In The Indus Script, Janaka-King Of Mithila-In The Indus Script,The Vedic Asvins, Yama And Kartikeya In The Indus Script, The Goddess Sarasvati And The Origin Of Brahmi And Kharoshthi, The Origin Of The Roman Aes Grave From The Indus Valley Money, A Solution To The Mystery Of  The Gundestrup  Cauldron, The Eternal Soma Of The Vedas,              Vedic Roots Of Ancient Egyptian Religion  -
I have shown that several seals contain vedic metrological terms,names of vedic ornaments,names of people, places and gods etc. My perception is that only a comprehensive study of ancient vedic  metrology can decipher the script symbols satisfactorily. A significant find herein is the existence of the Kalinga malla mana system during Harappan times challenging  the common perception of its origin from the later  Kalinga kingdom(Orissa).The unicorn is identified as the pala/nishka.Intersecting circles, fish , crab,bud,tower signs also have the same indications.The six locks of hair indicate  the paNameTa weight of six barley grains.Roots  and nuts indicate viira bhadra/ Drupada/ varaha/pala.We have located Lord Krishna’s Mathura and Dvaraka in the Indus valley scripts.
We have confirmed Mohenjodaro as the first Dvaraka
on the basis of the inscription on the copperplate B7C2 from there and textual evidences from the Rgveda, Mahabharata etc.We have located PadmakuuTa,one of the
palaces of Krishna there.Also we have identified the Sindhu(Indus) as the Vedic Sarasvati river.We have gone through the symbols  identifying the Bharadvajas,the clan of composers of the earliest vedic texts.In Krishna’s Dvaraka we gathered more details from the script on Lord Krishna’s Dvaraka and Sindhu/Sarasvati. We have looked into the
indications of the Harappan jar symbol with three forks on each edge.We have located  the Kasyapas in Hastinapura
trading with Sumeria.We have decoded the Mari Standard,went deeper into the meanings of several Sumerian images and confirmed Meluhha as Vedic Harappa/Indus valley. We have located Janaka,the king of Mithila,father-in-law of Rama, in the Indus script.We have identified the names of copper in the Indus script and located  the Asvins,Yama and Skanda  in the Indus script.In A Model For Indus Script Decipherment
we have identified the deity in the seal M-1181 and built a model for complete decipherment of the Indus script.
We have seen how  Brahmi and Kharoshthi evolved from the Indus Script and how the Indus script was in use along with Brahmi/Kharoshthi even into the  first centuries CE.We have seen how the coins of the ancient world,including the Roman coins evolved from the Indus valley money.
We have looked for  and located a Rosetta Stone for the Indus script, in the varaha/gadyanaka coin form.
We have gone into the relation of the Druids to the Indus valley civilisation and the role of their  Gundestrup cauldron
in the evolution of Christianity.
We have explored the relation of the Anau seal to the Indus Valley Civilisation.
We have studied  the vedic soma and its importance  in the life of the Harappans.
We have gone into the relationship of the Egyptian and Harappan deities.
In this article we are looking into a story from the New Testament which will help us understand the nature of the Indus symbols even better.

According to the  prevalent history of Bharata varsha as told by western scholars the Indus valley civilisation belonged to the
Dravida/Munda people and the vedic people(Aryans) reached India around 1900 BCE only . But in reality the Indus civilisation is vedic and the vedic people were in the Indus Valley at least from 6000BCE as seen from the excavations.
If an unknown script can explain the known myth and known history of a nation,what more proof is required to show that the script belongs to the same people.The script of Egypt explains
their myth and history.The script of Sumer,Akkad or Elam does the same.So it is natural for the Indus script to denote the myth
and history of the Hindu/Sindhu / Sarasvati/ vindu/vipra/sura/ bhuusura/bhudeva/bharata/kuru/pancala/Somaka  people.Hence we shall try to understand a bit of Indian history through the Indus script.We shall presently see  evidences pointing to the existence of the Aryans in the Indus Valley several millennia prior to the so called Aryan
arrival in the Indus valley.

In the last  articles we have looked into the writing of the Harappans in the early Ravi/Kot Diji phases and concluded that they are the same vedic people of the mature Harappan phase;we have  compared an inscribed  Ravi sherd showing  presence of the Pancalas/ Bharatas in the Indus valley before 3300BCE and a Taxila coin showing their presence in Taxila around 200 BCE confirming the continuity of the vedic civilisation in the Indus Valley from the early Harappan days;we have seen how an indus seal
portray the story of Ahalya described in later literature;
we have explored the universal idea of the mount of the dead Concept In The  Worship Of The Sun God .
One of the reasons for the hesitation of scholars  to accept
the Indus valley civilisation as vedic is that the Rg veda has
several passages referring to Asva-the horse and the veda
itself states that its horse has 34 ribs whereas modern horse
usually has 36 ribs.
In the last article we have gone into the issue of the vedic
horse and the number of its ribs. Interestingly many of the Harappan Inscriptions refer to the Asvamedha itself as we will see in the present article.There was no horse,but they are speaking of asvamedhas!

Les Dialectes indo-européens sont un des ouvrages parmi les plus importants d'Antoine Meillet. Il y expose sa doctrine sur des points difficiles, parfois controversés et sur lesquels, dans certains cas, il n'y a pas encore de consensus. Tout étudiant en grammaire comparée doit l'avoir lu. Il retrace les apparentements au sein de la famille indo-européenne et les influences de contacts que les différentes branches ont exercé l'une sur l'autre à date ancienne : les archaïsmes et les innovations, les périodes intermédiaires de communauté et, à l'occasion, les évolutions parallèles suivies par des groupes distincts. On sait maintenant qu'à l'arbre généalogique vertical en deux dimension inauguré par August Schleicher, il faut substituer, ou plutôt il faut compléter par des coupes horizontales, à un temps donné, dudit arbre : des rameaux initialement divergents ont pu s'influencer plus haut dans la ramure. Cela est particulièrement vrai du groupe balte et du groupe slave. Le dialectologie qui s'occupe de phonétique, de morphologie et de vocabulaire est au coeur de la grammaire comparée puisqu'elle présente un panorama général des relations entre les langues d'une même famille, en montrant ce qui les rapproche et ce qui les distingue. La première édition des Dialectes date de 1908 et la réimpression augmentée, de 1922. Le texte présenté ici a été entièrement recomposé dans sa dernière version. Celle-ci était la reproduction telle quelle de la première édition mais contenait un avant-propos de vingt pages de mise à jour avec des remarques complémentaires données chapitre par chapitre. On a, dans cette édition recomposée, inséré les compléments et remarques finales de l' « Avant-propos de la réimpression » à la fin de chaque chapitre concerné, pour faciliter le suivi de sa démonstration sur un sujet donné.

RÉSUMÉ. Le mot vénète est à la fois difficile à appréhender pour le chercheur, mais aussi pour les Vénètes eux-mêmes : les inscriptions vénètes étant caractéristiques des premières phases d'alphabétisation d'un peuple, des processus comme la ponctuation syllabique ont été mis en place pour faciliter l'apprentissage de l'écriture. On a longtemps considéré cette écriture comme relevant essentiellement de la sphère privée, mais l'inscription d'Este remet en cause cette théorie. Cette inscription apparemment publique pourrait être un traité de nature juridique ou bien un calendrier rituel. Si l'inscription vénète de Cartura (75ter) comporte vraisemblablement des éléments poétiques, cela ne semble pas être le cas de l'inscription d'Este.

ABSTRACT. It is difficult for us today to define the Venetic but it was also the case for the Venetic people. The Venetic inscriptions correspond to the early literacy stages of a civilization and tools like the syllabic punctuation were created to ease the writing process. It has been thought that writing belonged solely to the private sphere, but the Este inscription shows that it could have been otherwise. This public inscription could be a legal treaty or a ritual calendar. If at least one other Venetic inscription seems to show poetical effects similar to what can be observed in the Italic languages, it is not the case for the Este inscription.

Those place-names which combine noun + noun (and, to a lesser extent, adjective + noun) in close compounds are regarded as among the most ancient Irish place-names.  It is widely held that they reflect a structure dating back to the Common Celtic period due to their similarity to Brittonic and Gaulish compounds in  terms of structure and vocabulary.
In this paper, the Gaulish, British and Irish names are compared, particularly in terms of the repertoire of elements found in each set and the semantic categories represented. It is found that there is surprisingly little overlap between the Gaulish and Irish repertoires, both in terms of generic and specific elements.  In general, the British names, especially the Romano-British ones, offer better parallels with the Continent.
The close compound structure, inherited from Indo-European, is taken up in Ireland, but gets heavily adapted in terms of the repertoire of elements and is steadily replaced by other structures. The strongest connections with Gaulish names are found in Ulster and North Leinster.  There are areas where noun + noun compounds are scarce or absent.
The early Irish elements with non-cognate Gaulish synonyms merit further study, as a proportion of them may have non-Celtic origins.