View source for Talk:Indo-European

The article needed serious NPOVing: it did not have one particular bent, but there were lots of little paragraphs, partly redundant, that were at odds with each other.
have a look at the top of ''The Search for Indo European Origins'' where I tried to neutrally mention the different "emotional" issues. Some more integration work is still needed, though. Some POV claims I removed, for instance the assertion that 19th century research was tainted by racism from the outset. This simply doesn't do justice to the bulk of serious research. It's true that the Nazis made a big fuss of the 'Aryans', but the scholarly literature was only very marginally affected by this, so that the history of these distortions have a more adequate home in an article on the Nazis. Similarly, [[Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh|RSS]] style nationalistic views may be linked, but should be constrained to articles such as [[Aryan invasion theory]]. [[User:Dbachmann|Dbachmann]] 08:57, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)


----
Can somebody explain to me how a philosopher like Friedrich Nietzsche can have contributed to the discovery of the Indo-Europeans? It seems implausible to me. Thanks in advance. [[User:Andries|Andries]] 23:17, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

:I don't know anything about this in particular, but Nietzche was originally trained as a philologist, not as a philosopher, you know, so it's not at all beyond reason that he might have dabbled in this territory.[[User:Kukkurovaca| -- &#2325;&#2369;&#2325;&#2381;&#2325;&#2369;&#2352;&#2379;&#2357;&#2366;&#2330;]]|[[User talk:Kukkurovaca|Talk&#8253;]] 00:20, May 15, 2004 (UTC)

----

Wow, is Indogermanen really the German word for "Indo-European"? Those wacky, wacky Germans. [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/wiki.phtml?title=Indo-European&curid=14540&diff=0&oldid=0] I thought the "Indo-Germanic" thing was long dead...[[User:Kukkurovaca| -- &#2325;&#2369;&#2325;&#2381;&#2325;&#2369;&#2352;&#2379;&#2357;&#2366;&#2330;]]|[[User talk:Kukkurovaca|Talk&#8253;]] 17:18, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

--
Look,
* Nietzsche was trained as a classical philologist. This doesn't mean he has the slightest involvement with PIE. It is ridiculous to mention Nietzsche in this article, and to leave out people like Jones and Sommer etc. Mentioning Dumezil may be in order, even though his theories are badly outdated, and the controversies should be alluded to.
*  "Indogermanisch" is a technical term and has no Nazi bent whatsoever! I don't know what people are thinking. Probably the fact that some steppe tribe called themselves "arya" in 2000 BC makes them Nazis, according to this argument? "Indo-Germanic" as originally intended in the 19th century was a linguistic term supposed to express the geographical range of the language family, as it were a bracket, including the most eastern and the most northern, to avoid having to call it "indo-aryan-graeco-armeno-italo-celto-albano-germanic" or something. It was never meant to express dominance of germanic (or indic) languages of any sort. After the discovery of Tocharian, we would have to switch to "Tocharo-Germanic", but of course the confusion would not be worth it.

I will try to modify the article accordingly, as gently as I can manage.

[[User:Dbachmann|Dbachmann]] 13:18, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

----

I have removed "Mostly for political reasons" before "their very existence is also questioned by scholars". George Feuerstein's book
''In Search of the Cradle of Civilization'' gives many cogent arguments for India as the origin of Sanskrit, and perhaps of other Indo-European languages. In his book, ''Hinduism: a Short Introduction'', Klaus Klostermaier summarizes and seems to accept these arguments.

It is true that tools of the right-wing BJP have made similar arguments for political reasons, but the inclusion of this clause may lead right-thinking readers to unnecessarily reject these lines of inquiry.

----
Does BJP mean what I think it does!!??

If you were thinking [[Bharatiya Janata Party]] ("Indian People's Party"), then yes!