Comparative method
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
| Revision as of 08:59, 30 October 2010 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 18:50, 18 December 2017 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) (Comparative method moved to Comparative method (linguistics)) Next diff → |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| <blockquote>"In the present work an attempt is made to set forth the inferred Indo-European original language side by side with its really existent derived languages. Besides the advantages offered by such a plan, in setting immediately before the eyes of the student the final results of the investigation in a more concrete form, and thereby rendering easier his insight into the nature of particular Indo-European languages, there is, I think, another of no less importance gained by it, namely that it shows the baselessness of the assumption that the non-Indian Indo-European languages were derived from Old-Indian (Sanskrit)."</blockquote> | <blockquote>"In the present work an attempt is made to set forth the inferred Indo-European original language side by side with its really existent derived languages. Besides the advantages offered by such a plan, in setting immediately before the eyes of the student the final results of the investigation in a more concrete form, and thereby rendering easier his insight into the nature of particular Indo-European languages, there is, I think, another of no less importance gained by it, namely that it shows the baselessness of the assumption that the non-Indian Indo-European languages were derived from Old-Indian (Sanskrit)."</blockquote> | ||
| - | [[File:Fi-ugr-turk-comparison.png|thumb|375px|Various linguists have seen these North Eurasian languages as part of: <ul><li>a [[Ural-Altaic]] [[language family]] (popular until 1960s)</li><li>a [[Uralic]] and an [[Altaic]] family ([[Anna V. Dybo|Dybo]], [[Roy Andrew Miller|Miller]], [[Nicholas Poppe|Poppe]])</li><li>separate Uralic, [[Turkic languages|Turkic]] and [[Mongolian language|Mongolian]] families ([[Gerard Clauson|Clauson]], [[Gerhard Dörfer|Dörfer]], [[Stefan Georg|Georg]])</li><li>a [[Eurasiatic]] or [[Nostratic]] [[macrofamily]] ([[Joseph Greenberg|Greenberg]], [[Sergei Starostin|Starostin]], [[Allan Bomhard|Bomhard]])</li></ul>]] | ||
| - | |||
| ==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Revision as of 18:50, 18 December 2017
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
In linguistics, the comparative method is a technique for studying the development of languages by performing a feature-by-feature comparison of two or more languages, as opposed to the method of internal reconstruction, which analyzes the internal development of a single language over time. Ordinarily both methods are used together to reconstruct prehistoric phases of languages, to fill in gaps in the historical record of a language, to discover the development of phonological, morphological, and other linguistic systems, and to confirm or refute hypothesized relationships between languages.
The comparative method was developed over the 19th century. Key contributions were made by the Danish scholars Rasmus Rask and Karl Verner and the German scholar Jacob Grimm. The first linguist to offer reconstructed forms from a proto-language was August Schleicher, in his Compendium der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen, originally published in 1861.
"In the present work an attempt is made to set forth the inferred Indo-European original language side by side with its really existent derived languages. Besides the advantages offered by such a plan, in setting immediately before the eyes of the student the final results of the investigation in a more concrete form, and thereby rendering easier his insight into the nature of particular Indo-European languages, there is, I think, another of no less importance gained by it, namely that it shows the baselessness of the assumption that the non-Indian Indo-European languages were derived from Old-Indian (Sanskrit)."
See also
