Indo-Hittite

{{Infobox language family

| name = Indo-Hittite

| region =

| familycolor = Indo-European

| family = Proposed primary language family

| protoname = Proto-Indo-Hittite

| child1 = Anatolian {{Extinct}}

| child2 = Other Indo-European languages

| ancestor =

| iso2 = ine

| iso5 = ine

| glotto = indo1319

| glottoname = Indo-European

| map =

| mapcaption =

| notes =

| iso3comment = code for Indo-European

}}

In Indo-European linguistics, the term Indo-Hittite (also Indo-Anatolian) refers to Edgar Howard Sturtevant's 1926 hypothesis that the Anatolian languages split off a Pre-Proto-Indo-European language considerably earlier than the separation of the remaining Indo-European languages. The prefix Indo- does not refer to the Indo-Aryan branch in particular, but stands for Indo-European, and the -Hittite part refers to the Anatolian language family as a whole.

Proponents of the Indo-Hittite hypothesis claim the separation preceded the spread of the remaining branches by several millennia, possibly as early as 7000 BC. In this context, the proto-language before the split of Anatolian would be called Proto-Indo-Hittite, and the proto-language of the remaining branches, before the next split, presumably of Tocharian, would be called Proto-Indo-European (PIE). This is a matter of terminology, though, as the hypothesis does not dispute the ultimate genetic relation of Anatolian with Indo-European; it just means to emphasize the assumed magnitude of temporal separation.

According to Craig Melchert, the current tendency is to suppose that Proto-Indo-European evolved, and that the "prehistoric speakers" of Anatolian became isolated "from the rest of the PIE speech community, so as not to share in some common innovations."{{harvnb|Melchert|2012|p=7}}. Hittite, as well as its Anatolian cousins, split off from Proto-Indo-European at an early stage, thereby preserving archaisms that were later lost in the other Indo-European languages.{{harvnb|Jasanoff|2003|p=20 with footnote 41}}.

Linguistics

Traditionally there has been a strong notion among Indo-European linguistics that the Anatolian branch was separated earlier than other branches. Within the framework of the Kurgan hypothesis, the split is estimated to have occurred in roughly 4000 BC.

Some fundamental shared features such as the aorist category of the verb (which denotes action without reference to duration or completion), with the perfect active particle -s fixed to the stem, link the Anatolian languages closer to the southeastern languages such as Greek and ArmenianBritannica 15th edition 22:593. and to Tocharian.{{cite encyclopedia |last1=Adams |first1=Douglas Q. |last2=Lane |first2=George S. |author1-link=Douglas Q. Adams |editor1-last=Preece |editor1-first=Warren E. |editor2-last=Goetz |editor2-first=Philip W. |editor1-link=Warren Preece |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |title=Tocharian languages |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tocharian-languages |chapter-url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tocharian-languages#ref74840 |edition=15th |date=2010 |orig-date=1974 |volume=22 |isbn=978-1-59339-292-5 |page=667 |chapter=The Tocharian problem}}

Features such as the lack of feminine gender in the declensions of nominals, a division between an "animate" common gender and an "inanimate" neuter gender, a reduced vowel system, a tendency towards a greater simplicity of the case system, a less typical Indo-European vocabulary and other striking features have been interpreted alternately as archaic retentions, which means that the common Indo-European structural features observed in the non-Anatolian branches evolved at a later stage, or just as later innovations being caused by prolonged contacts in typologically alien surroundings "en route" or after their arrival in Anatolia.

In favor of the Indo-Hittite hypothesis is the very Indo-European agricultural terminology conserved in Anatolia, otherwise considered the cradle of agriculture, and the laryngeal theory that hypothesizes the existence of one or more additional spirant or stop consonants in the Indo-European parent language that has only been attested in Hittite and of which only traces are left outside Anatolian.Britannica 15th edition, 22 p. 586, 589, 593.

However, in general this hypothesis is considered to attribute too much weight to the Anatolian evidence and as early as 1938 it was demonstrated that the Anatolian group should be placed on the same level as other Indo-European subgroups and not as equal with Indo-European. 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.Britannica 15th edition, 22 p. 594, "Indo-Hittite hypothesis".

Genetics

Recent paleogenetic studies of population migration reportedly give new credence to Proto-Indo-Anatolian theories,{{cite journal |title=The genetic history of the Southern Arc: A bridge between West Asia and Europe |year=2022 |doi=10.1126/science.abm4247 |last1=Lazaridis |first1=Iosif |last2=Alpaslan-Roodenberg |first2=Songül |last3=Acar |first3=Ayşe |last4=Açıkkol |first4=Ayşen |last5=Agelarakis |first5=Anagnostis |last6=Aghikyan |first6=Levon |last7=Akyüz |first7=Uğur |last8=Andreeva |first8=Desislava |last9=Andrijašević |first9=Gojko |last10=Antonović |first10=Dragana |last11=Armit |first11=Ian |last12=Atmaca |first12=Alper |last13=Avetisyan |first13=Pavel |last14=Aytek |first14=Ahmet İhsan |last15=Bacvarov |first15=Krum |last16=Badalyan |first16=Ruben |last17=Bakardzhiev |first17=Stefan |last18=Balen |first18=Jacqueline |last19=Bejko |first19=Lorenc |last20=Bernardos |first20=Rebecca |last21=Bertsatos |first21=Andreas |last22=Biber |first22=Hanifi |last23=Bilir |first23=Ahmet |last24=Bodružić |first24=Mario |last25=Bonogofsky |first25=Michelle |last26=Bonsall |first26=Clive |last27=Borić |first27=Dušan |last28=Borovinić |first28=Nikola |last29=Bravo Morante |first29=Guillermo |last30=Buttinger |first30=Katharina |journal=Science |volume=377 |issue=6609 |pages=eabm4247 |pmid=36007055 |pmc=10064553 |s2cid=251843620 |display-authors=1 |doi-access=free }} but several linguists have disputed this and believe that genetics cannot accurately describe historical language change.{{cite book |last1=Pereltsvaig |first1=Asya |title=The Indo-European Controversy: Facts and Fallacies in Historical Linguistics |date=2015 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge |isbn=978-1107054530}}{{Synthesis inline|date=May 2025|Reason=Pereltsvaig's book predates Lazaridis et al. by 7 years.}}

Notes

References

{{cite book | last=Jasanoff | first=Jay H. | author-link=Jay Jasanoff |title=Hittite and the Indo-European Verb | location=Oxford, UK | publisher=Oxford University Press | date=2003 | isbn=9780199249053 |doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199249053.001.0001}}
{{cite web |first=H. Craig |last=Melchert |author-link=Craig Melchert |title=The Position of Anatolian |date=2012 |url=http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/Melchert/The%20Position%20of%20AnatolianRevised3.pdf}}
{{cite book |last1=Schmidt |first1=Karl Horst |title=Reconstructing Languages and Cultures |date=1992 |publisher=Mouton de Gruyter |location=Berlin |isbn=9783110126716 |pages=35–62 |chapter=Contributions from new data to the reconstruction of the proto-language |doi=10.1515/9783110867923.35 |series=Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs |volume=58 |editor1-first=Edgar C. |editor1-last=Polomé |editor1-link=Edgar C. Polomé |editor2-first=Werner |editor2-last=Winter |editor2-link=Werner Winter (linguist)}}
{{cite journal |last1=Sturtevant |first1=Edgar Howard |author1-link=Edgar Howard Sturtevant |title=Hittite Glossary: Words of Known or Conjectured Meaning, with Sumerian Ideograms and Accadian Words Common in Hittite Texts |journal=Language |date=1931 |volume=7 |issue=2 |pages=3–82 |doi=10.2307/522061 |publisher=Linguistic Society of America |series=Language Monograph, 9 |jstor=522061}}
{{cite journal | last=Sturtevant |first=Edgar Howard | title=The Development of the Stops in Hittite |journal=Journal of the American Oriental Society |volume=52 |pages=1–12 |date=1932 | doi=10.2307/593573 | jstor=593573 | issue=1 | publisher=American Oriental Society}}
{{cite book |last1=Sturtevant |first1=Edgar Howard |last2=Hahn |first2=E. Adelaide |author2-link=E. Adelaide Hahn |title=A Comparative Grammar of the Hittite Language |publisher=Yale University Press |location=New Haven, CT |volume=1 |url=https://archive.org/details/SturtevantHahnAComparativeGrammarOfTheHittiteLanguageI2ndEdition1951 |series=William Dwight Whitney Linguistic Series |orig-date=1933}}
{{cite book |last1=Sturtevant |first1=Edgar H. |title=The Indo-Hittite laryngeals |date=1942 |publisher=Linguistic Society of America |location=Baltimore, MD |doi=10.2307/j.ctt1x76d2x |jstor=j.ctt1x76d2x}}
{{cite journal |last=Sturtevant |first=Edgar H. |title=Evidence for Voicing in Indo-Hittite γ |journal=Language |volume=16 |pages=81–87 |date=1940 |doi=10.2307/408942 |jstor=408942 |issue=2 |publisher=Linguistic Society of America}}
{{cite book |last1=Sturtevant |first1=Edgar H. |first2=George |last2=Bechtel |date=1935 |title=A Hittite Chrestomathy |location=Philadelphia, PA |publisher=Linguistic Society of America |url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.279400 |series=William Dwight Whitney Linguistic Series}}

Indo-Hittite

Linguistics

Genetics

See also

Notes

References

Further reading