isn't sanskrit considered indo-european? wikipedia says it is
Conversation
but that the dravidian languages are structurally unrelated to the entire indo-european family
1
1
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
It doesn't claim to be all languages (Chinese and African languages are missing), only proto-indo-European (PIE) descended.
2
1
Sanskrit is a small side node because it is a dead classics language so few living speakers. The chart is speaker-population-sized
1
An interesting q is "Sanskrit derived" vocabulary. I suspect pop notion of common languages being "derived" from scholarly is 100% backwards
1
Modern commoner langs are derived from dead commoner languages. "Sanskritization" is likely 75% shared historic roots rather than "descent"
2
Point being, Sanskrit is rich, evil great-uncle not direct ancestor. I suspect same is true of other "classical" elite languages like Latin.
1
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
by "sanskritised" do you mean deliberate and systematic insertion of sanskrit vocabulary?
6
Translations of the Mahabharata and Vedas must have had a huge payload of Sanskrit. The story of Agastya crossing the Vindhyas = allegory

