Talk:Burushaski

Languages B‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Pakistan Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Interesting quote, but I don't know enough about Burushaski to work this into the article (or if it should be worked in):" Of fruit trees, only the apple (*abel) was known [to the Proto-Indo-Europeans], and there are some indications that it is a loan-word into Indo-European from another, autochthonous language whose sole survivor is Burushaski, spoken in the remote fastnesses of Kashmir." This was written by Calvert Watkins in his essay, Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans (from 1969 or so). Alexander 007 07:06, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

User:Vlatkoto added some material into Hunza (which I removed; it was not pertinent for that article), a claim that Burushaski language is "supposed" (the "supposers" are not named) to be descended from the Ancient Macedonian language. Pseudo-science. Ilija Casule sees connections between Burushaski and the Paleo-Balkan languages (Thracian, Phrygian), but I don't know whether he actually claims that Burushaski is descended from XMK. There seem to be Pakistani legends which mention a Macedonian origin for the Burusho (though those kind of legends are common in the area for various peoples; they are indeed a cliché). Alexander 007 03:31, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If Burushaski were IE, that would have been picked up long ago. The only possibility I see is that the paleo-Balkan languages were non-IE, but we hardly have enough data to assert that. kwami 06:34, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. But see also Lemnian language and Pelasgian language, both most likely non-IE (Aegean languages). Burushaski may (or may not :-) ) be related to some ancient non-IE Aegean language, but not XMK. BTW, the linguist who is trying to establish an ancient Balkan origin (and Balto-Slavic connection) for Burushaski, Ilija Casule, is an ethnic (Slavic)Macedonian; the background of a linguist is usually not irrelevant. Alexander 007 06:36, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just clicked on the German article (which is more expansive than the English article so far), but found no mention of Paleo-Balkan, Aegean, Phrygian, Thracian etc. I did find mention of Sumerian, Urartian, Basque, and some others. Seems like they've been shooting in the dark for awhile. I can only assume that Casule's ideas are very marginal or even idiosyncratic (I have not read his stuff yet). Though let me make it clear that I have not confirmed that Casule actually claims that Burushaski is descended from XMK; I have not tracked down that particular claim beyond some Wikipedia contributors (User:Vlatkoto and apparently someone else in Mir of Hunza. Alexander 007 07:56, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

we'll need references for each identification claim. It's easy to say that every language isolate was associated with Sumerian, Basque and what not, the question is when and by whom. The Paleo-Balkans stuff is highly suspect. This linguist seems to have done work with (Slavic) Macedonian and suddenly, lo and behold, he discovers that Burushaski is not just Indo-European, no, it is the missing link between Slavic and XMK. I can only roll my eyes at that. Connecting XMK and Slavic Macedonian seems to be the holy grail of linguistics in the Rep. of Mac. dab (ᛏ) 08:49, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested in Casule's arguments/alleged evidence. Apparently he has found what he thinks are lexical correspondances between Burushaski and Paleo-Balkan languages (and Balto-Slavic), and some other alleged similarities (I once read a short synopsis for his book, which claimed many lexical correspondances) . Not sure what his claim actually is however---that Burushaski descends from PIE? That PIE and the ancestor of Burushaki share an even older common ancestor? Or that Proto-Burushaski was a partly Indo-European creole? If anybody has more info on Casule's stuff, please share. You can find a number of his works on the subject listed here [1], as well as a general bibliography for Burushaski. I have not confirmed that Casule is really the source of those "Burushaski descends from XMK" crank theories, and maybe the guy has done some good work concerning Thracian, Phrygian, and Burushaski, who knows. Alexander 007 10:16, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at the distribution of Y-haplogroups in the Burusho

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v15/n1/pdf/5201726a.pdf C3 (paleoindian Y-haplogroup, hardly original for the Burusho) 8,2%, H1 (the first Europid wave to India; again hardly original 4,1%, J2 (neolithic colonization from the Near East) 7,2%, L (proto-Dravidian) 16,5%, Q 2,1% (=the Yeniseian hypothesis is very probably false), R (R*???) 10,3%, R1a1 (Aryan admixture) 27,9%, R2 14,4%. There seems to be nothing particularly exceptional - except the high percentage of R2. This is the highest percentage of R2 outside India - besides some Kurdish groups, which suggests that Kurds or the proto-Kurd (Mitanni Aryan?) population got to their current seats from today's Central Asia. It would be important to compare this profile with the mtDNA haplogroup percentages. However, judging from this result, I would say that Burushaski may be descendants of R2 people, i.e. they are very distantly related to European Cro-Magnons and even more distantly related to Siberian Paleoindians. 82.100.61.114 13:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Think about this, when thinking about BurushaSKI: 1. MacedonIAN on Macedonian is: MakedonSKI 2. SerbIAN on Serbian (and Macedonian) is: SrpSKI 3. CroatIAN on Croatian (and Macedonian) is: HrvatSKI 4. BulgarIAN on Bulgarian (and Macedonian) is: B'lgarSKI (BugarSKI) should i go on?

Give me another example of this similarity in another language? If English knew them earlier it was going to be BurushIAN... If it was connected to some other language - what was it going to be named?

Of course that languages change, as ours (Makedonski and Burushaski) has changed after 23 centuries, but some of the basic concepts may stay for longer.

BTW, I am also interested: What is the name for 'rain' in Burushaski? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.29.247.252 (talk) 22:52, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That has nothing to do with it. As far as I know, the Slavic-resembling ending -ski in Burushaski is just a coincidence. 'Rain' in Burushaski is harált or daú. — N-true (talk) 18:31, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is that "ú" letter in the 'daú'? Would you like to tell me similar voice in english? like in some English word? Rtgs (talk) 20:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an expert on the subject but it has been pointed on the article that the burushaski language may have its roots in and/or relativity to sumerian and yenisey languages.Some even suggest a link to the north american languages. Sumerian language has many common words and grammar with turkish and hungarian both whom are of central asian descent. Yenisey language also flourished around Aral lake and both Turkish and Hun Language (the origins of the hun language are still disputed I suppose some say its an early dialect of turkish, a form of proto-turkish or a mongolian dialect etc the list goes on) were spoken around these regions. Also certain north american languages have similarities to central asian (Ural/altaic) languages. Geographically speaking is it not possible that the burushaski language may have a relativity to turkish/hun/mongolian languages? I do not know if any research has been done over this subject. I would like to know if anyone has some knowledge or opinion over the subject?

No way. Sumerian has no or almost no common words with Turkish (an Altaic language) or Hungarian (a Uralic language), and only the basic type of grammar is the same (all three are agglutinative languages). The Yeniseian languages are different again – very different. I am not aware of North American languages with similarities to either Uralic or Altaic languages (let alone both), even though some do have similarities to the Yeniseian languages (see Dené-Caucasian languages). David Marjanović 11:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the following paragraph:

Burushaski has loanwords from Sanskrit (like "shiri") and Arabic ("iil") and a term to burn dead (jaaie) at (jaaiemichin) origin Buddhist culture. These are loanwords to or from the Burushaski language. Some words are similar, like "birgoosh" in Hungarian, or "qara" for "black" and "baig" for "prince" from Chinese Turkish. Some words are borrowed from Chitral too, like "shapik" for "bread".

I can quote from a letter sent to me this morning:

What “shiri” and “iil” mean is not explained. There is /s.íri/ ‘Heuschrecke’ (with retroflex [s.] – what does this mean – it’s not in my dictionary). /il/ ‘Nadelöhr, Loch (in der Perle usw.), usw.’ and /–íl/ ‘Lippe; Ufer, Rand ...’...

I have no idea what “birgoosh” is: no such word in Berger’s dictionary, and ‘black’ is not /qara/, it is /mat-(úm)/, and ‘prince’ is not /baig/ but /bapó/ or /guśpúr/. The fact that some words are similar to words in other languages is irrelevant, unless a plausible historical link can be shown. Chitral is not a language but a region, etc.

The article needs heavy editing. The external relationships can be mentioned, but they should be cited properly. The article is ignoring Hermann Berger’s books, also ignoring Bengtson’s “Ein Vergleich von Buruschaski und Nordkaukasisch” and review of Čašule. As for the grammar, there is very little information. No information is given on the dialect differences, etc.

Petr, why didn't you sign?

The e-mail is from John Bengtson, who gets too confused by the Internet to edit Wikipedia himself. I'll edit the article soon according to that e-mail. German Heuschrecke means "grasshopper". David Marjanović 11:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Kwamikagami! It took me several hours to make my edit, so when at the end I was told there was an edit conflict, I simply copied my entire version over your entire version. Please make your edit again. David Marjanović 17:32, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Mine was very minor. kwami 17:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But very important! :-) I'll need to modify the Dené-Caucasian article accordingly. David Marjanović 22:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]