Land Determines The Formation of the Group Languages

1

 Journey of civilizations

When we speak of civilization, we mean the materialistic and spiritual expressions of the people living in certain regions. From ancient times, many civilizations have flourished in different parts of the world. Some have collapsed to give a way to new ones or merged with the mighty civilizations or have changed with the time but showing its continuity of basic elements through its course. 

How do we differ between civilizations? What criterions normally do we use to differentiate one civilization from others? We normally classify the civilizations by their architecture, religious beliefs, war and other technologies, script, languages, mythologies, burial practices those indicate life-after-death concepts. There could be some other aspects but what I have enumerated are major those easily can help us to differentiate the civilizations. When we speak of Egypt, Pyramids automatically appear before our eyes and when we talk of the Indus-Ghaggar civilization seals, planned cities, brick-paved roads and great baths do flash in an instant in our minds. So, architecture becomes a major part of our general classification of the civilizations.

We know about some of the languages spoken in the ancient civilizations, thanks to the written records and their decipherments, same time we do not know what were the languages spoken in many civilizations for lack of the written records or inability to decipher their script in an absence of Rosetta stone. Though we may have deciphered records, we may not know even how the language was pronounced. Indus script and linier A of Greeks are fine examples of undecophered scripts. We may find that the scripts of ancient civilizations, though mostly an independent development, their influences still are detectable in the areas of shadow civilizations. Such as Greek early script was introduced to them by Phoenicians which was further modified to suit the various dialects of Greeks.

We also are aware that every civilization had independent religious concepts and mythologies.  We also find from the archaeological layers the changes in the pantheon of the deities and their changed priorities and evolution in the ritualistic priorities. However, some superficial similarities, too, do occur baffling the archeologists and linguists prompting them to propose theories of “outside influences” caused by migrating people. There are examples here for such theories those have been fought viciously by the scholars. For example, from eighteenth century onwards Aryan Invasion Theories were in vogue those claimed migrations ns of mighty Aryan Race from some hypothetical original homeland, riding in spoke-wheeled chariots, subjugating other contemporary races enforcing their “polished language” and culture over them. The theory did no good to the world. Rather the world experienced genocide and destructive Second World War. Later, the theory was replaced with dispersals of the Proto Indo-0European speakers from some hypothetical original homeland However; underlined meaning remained the same, racist and supremacist. 

However, we cannot attribute all the time such migrating hoards for causing immense impact on the already established civilizations. We should not forget here that the pre-civilization era, when agriculture was not yet invented and humans in bands were roaming in the known regions for search of the food and grazing lands for his cattle. This was the period that roughly begins from 60,000 BC and continues till 10,000 BC. In this vast span of the time, human beings learnt many things…language was one of them. Faculty to speak is as old as hundred thousand years. From proto-abstract-sounds meaningful words were developed, exchanged between the tribes and thus multiplying to the rudimentary vocabulary. Since the human transactions were limited, not so complex, language too was primary. All the vocabulary did not comprise of independent innovations but some was accumulated through the exchanges and borrowings as well. Not only vocabulary, the religious concepts too did evolve during this era. The technologies, such as stone weaponry, stone-utensils and bark or skin-clothing and artificial shelters too were developed. The geographical sense and regional affinities too must have been evolved in this transitional phase when he transgressed from hunter-gatherer man to a pastoral man. About 40000 years ago we find sudden cultural explosion across the globe that involved from jewelry making to specific funeral practices.  We cannot attribute such cultural innovations taking place in single tribe and at a single location but can attribute them to the continuous exchanges, imitations, modifications and independent or joint advancements out of the need of the human being. The stone weaponry is a common feature of all the human species spread across the globe. It was not invention of any single tribe, but of all the tribes of those times. The early inventions mostly have been out of the grave necessity of survival against all odds.

Era of foragers must have been too interesting in many aspects. First of all a vital question remains unsolved that whether early humane first appeared on some certain place (e.g. Africa) and then later dispersed to populate the globe or had it been the multi-location creation is a hotly debated topic amongst scholars today. Though I support multiregional model against Out of Africa theory which proposes single location model for it has its own limitations loaded with Biblical Adam-Eve fantasies.

Anyway, there is no doubt that the early human was forager. But the most important question would be how he must have been deciding on which directions to move? How did he chart out his dispersal map and what was his motivation? He mustn’t have roamed aimlessly to any direction where he hoped for food and game. In all probabilities he must have known the regions where he could find enough food and shelter. People always accommodate with the known environments and the available food. The regional food habits vary greatly even today. Then in ancient times such variation naturally would be greater. 

Early populations, about 60,000 years ago were far limited, could be possibly one person per square kilometer at the most. The earth was going through the Ice Age during those times. However, far remote and climatically hostile regions, such as Antarctica and nearer regions to the North Pole must have been avoided by him. He had formed bands, mostly consisting of the blood related people. He soon must have learnt what was edible and what was not. But the process wouldn’t have been that simple. He would have tried various vegetation, fruits and meat. After lot many accidents or catching fatal diseases he would have carefully selected his diet. He must have known soon which animal were dangerous and who weren’t! As we find regional variety of flora and fauna and forestry, changing seasons and its influence on its growth, he too must have observed minutely the change in the nature with changing seasons. Why his roaming must been limited to the known regions is only because he must have preferred the places where he could find known food and game…and even known tribes with whom they could establish dialogue.

For the fear of unknown, he must have limited his life within the known regions where he could feel safety and assurance of survival, is but natural.

But how far he could have been reaching? There is no material proof available to indicate a single tribe’s journey, its original place and its course of travel. However, there are suggestive hypotheses that the some tribes had travelled across the oceans to populate remote islands in ancient past. What forced them out of their place of origin or region may remain speculative. It could be either because sudden climatic changes forced them to leave the known regions or it was an eternal zeal of the human being to know the unknown, risking life sometimes! However, it appears that the human preferred his known geography for his survival and dared unknown in much unforeseen circumstances.

The scholars do admit that the foraging communities had lot of leisure time. What they needed from the surrounding was the food. Working few hours a day would be enough for them. Rest of the time, unlike other animal kind, there must have been attempts to communicate, making tools and weapons from the stones and bones. Evenings they might have been dancing with their early rudimentary vocal songs, may be meaningless yet with some meaning they only could comprehend. The language, we can find, has roots in the early life of the foragers.

While looking at the recorded archaeological civilizations, we cannot limit our search at that point but have to go back at the earliest era when the modern human being emerged on the earth and started thinking and express. Forager man could think. He could differentiate between useful and useless, fearsome and friendly. The elements of the early religion too can be attributed to the foragers. From archaeological proofs we find the burial practices getting more and more systematic and elaborative. He must have some ideas about life after death otherwise the burial practices wouldn’t have been felt necessary. He must have envisaged the good forces, invisible but to him existent and so the bad forces. Among tribes they must have discussed vehemently on them, creating the mythologies out of their past experiences or from the rudimentary legends flown to them. Need of the creating new words to explain various actions and things and for deities, demons, variety of the abstract forces and extant technologies and even flora-fauna thus was the imminent necessity. The cave paintings of Altamira (France) and Bhimbetka of India give us clear hints of their life styles and weapons used in hunting, their dances and their earlier domesticated animal. And most importantly an immense urge of expression.

The tribal identities from kinship must have become stronger with the strengthening of the tribal egos. The totems were the early identities of the tribal clans. The struggles over power within the tribe must have caused the branching of the tribes or bloodbath within the tribes. However overall population must have been fluctuating for the wars, epidemics and natural calamities to which as yet they had no cure o remedy for. Many tribes could have become extinct. Otherwise, it is affirmatively has been proved from the fossil organisms that the health of the foragers was often better than of the people of early farming communities.  The average life expectances, though low, but there have been evidences that many persons lived up to sixty-seventies.

However, no matter whether the first appearance of the human was a single location phenomena or multi-regional event, the fact is the territorial consciousness in the foragers was a phenomenon that became foundation of the early civilizations.

How they envisaged the geography? Did they know distant regions? Had they been roaming round the earth during foraging era? We must look at the facts that the foragers had limited their roaming in the known territories and frequently came across the same tribes. Every tribe naturally had multiple tribal contacts thus sharing the information of the far away tribes. We can call it ‘Territorial Tribal Culture’ those had many features in common. Asia, Africa and Europe are the continents those are interconnected and yet isolated for their peculiar geographical features. Hence naturally the continental interaction would be far less, but not that insignificant as well.  Every continental tribe’s internal and external interaction naturally would be in a varying degree. The exchanges, linguistics and of technological advances or imitations did spread across the territories because of this. We find many archaic words common in many parts of the world because of such exchanges. However, the fact remains that though there are many common words, the civilizations could not retain original pronunciations and at many a places, meanings. That way, there is no linguistic root to any word because there is no way to find where the word originated and what it was meant originally! There are so many Vedic words in Vedic language those yet remain in use but the meaning is altered drastically. Today when we speak of PIE language origins we speak of the history of just 4-5 thousand years. History of any language is far far remote than this period. There is no reason to claim supremacy for any language because languages do not emerge from any supreme mind but the imminent needs of the mind.

As far the known world of the individual tribe, what we understand from the history that the people did not know farthest regions. They didn’t know at all the geographical end of their known world. They thought the region intimately known to them was center of the universe. The territorial psychologies are interesting that exhibit specific patterns. Those psychologies we find reflected in their religions, mythologies and architecture and so many other cultural aspects. We find From Avesta, Rig Veda and Egyptian scriptures that they knew the world, about five hundred square miles from their respective locations. They mythologized the territories those were heard of but not seen. River Rasa (Tigris) appears in Avesta and Rig Veda as mythical boundary of their world. Alexander on his mission to India did think that beyond India the world ends. Every civilisation had its own eerie idea about size of the universe.  Hence the claims that new people appeared to effect cultural changes in any civilization are not only doubtful but meaningless. The fact is there is no concept like “New People” does exist on this earth.

Although, as a human being, it is but natural that the fundamental features of the psychological functioning would be the same, same time we clearly can see that the psychological patterns changing with every region. The patterns reflect in the culture, in the language and spirituality of every regional culture. No matter how geographically societies are close still speaking varying dialects.  We should call it “Regional Psychology”. We should also find out why the regional psychologies differ to such extent even within the people of same ethnicity and religions!  Anyway, we shall deal with this in more detail in the next chapters.

Agricultural revolution

Invention of the agriculture has been a turning point in the life of early foragers those had turned to pastoral society by 20,000 BC. Agriculture changed his life dramatically. Although, because of excavated archaeological proofs, it is believed that the agriculture was invented around 7000+ BC, the agro-era in reality can be even older by few more millenniums than that of the assumed era.

We do not know when exactly it came to the mind of the pastoral people that he needs not to wander for for food and fodder, but he could produce it. He must have observed the cycle of the nature, seeds sprouting to grow like the same vegetation. He would have come across the variety of wild plants of maize or other food. He could have actually consumed them. The knowledge of re-growing of the same vegetation after showers must have been acquired from ancient times. He even could have applied it for the fruit-yielding trees by sowing the seeds and would have observed for years in awe the growth of it, if spared by nature. However, it seems he didn’t think he actually could produce food by systematic application of the cultivation.

However at about, say ten thousand years ago, there seems sudden rise in agricultural practices across the globe. The Mehrgarh and Zagros sites are the archaeological sites those are examples of the oldest agriculture practices. What could be reasons for almost all the tribes turned to agriculture? ? It couldn’t have been new invention, the agriculture. Could have been practiced arbitrarily, may be as a fun. But he didn’t practice it as a mean of livelihood, or at the least it would seem so. We have to find what exactly could have happened that the suddenly foragers/pastorals turned to the agriculture and led to the settled life.

Climatic changes

There is a close association of the climatic changes in rise and falls of the human civilizations. It has not only forced human being to change its ways of living but cultural patterns as well.  Recent examples are the decline of Mesopotamian, Indus and Chinese civilization and others those came to decline about 1800 BC because of the gradual climatic change. The living patterns did change because of sudden rise into the aridity which forced humans to look for new ways to survive under changed climatic scenario.

We have to look into the climatic history of the earth. The human being of those times had experienced cold era which is known as Ice Age. The period was more hostile, difficult for survival and cultivation. However, the genetic makeup of fossilized bones, dating back about 37,000 years ago, found in Western Russia suggests the continuous history of the Europeans. However, ice age, it seems, kept populations limited. But people largely lived in the same areas during the ice age and after. This is evident from the DNA of Kostenki man that was similar to the 24000 year old boy found in central Siberia.  This also indicates to the fact that the people were more rooted with their known territories despite of the climatic conditions.

About 12 thousand years ago or little before the Holocene age began. This was warmer age. The ice melt caused rising of the sea levels, by about almost 115 feet’s. Some animal species became extinct because they could not cope up with climate change. There could have been population loss during the transitional phase of climate change. Human was forced to change his life style. The innate urge of the survival made him to find new ways for livelihood. Our ancestors were product of Ice Age. They had experienced glacial era and had adjusted their life style accordingly with it.

However, the change in the nature, though not sudden, must have forced him to look for new ways for survival. It is quite possible that the humans would have extended their settlements to earlier uninhibited regions for end of the Ice Age would have emptied many regions covered by ice caps.

The beginning of the agrarian life coincides with the beginning of Holocene. This means this era has very significant and meaningful in our ancient history. Agriculture helped early agrarians to settle down in respective regions wherever he could permanently cultivate. The river valleys were natural choice for assurance of water supply and fertile lands. This was a revolutionary turn in human history. It dramatically changed his lifestyle and social references. In real sense he got rooted to the land. The territories or the regions he used to be wander about already had become further limited because of the agriculture. 

As humans started settling down, except for neighboring settlers, his exchanges of the cultural advances became limited. The settled life demanded for various inventions and innovations. Implements for the agriculture, permanent houses and safeguards would have been his first need to adjust with the new life. Early architecture, crops, various utensils, potteries etc. were outcome of the needs of the people of those times. He also would have needed new vocabulary to express this change and new innovations.

However, this transitional phase too wouldn’t have been easy. The wars, aggressions to occupy fertile lands by the large or aggressive tribes would have been evident. Many smaller or weak tribes would have been subjugated, even enslaved or made extinct. The tumulous situation persisted for long period of time in human history. Even the otherwise peaceful sounding Indus civilization had to build fortification walls around their cities for protection.

10,000 BC onwards till 5000 BC we find the growth of the rural settlements all over the globe. Many such ancient village sites are found and excavated. Gobelki Tepe, Nevali Kori, Jhusi etc are such ancient sites.  Many more has been erased from the pages of the history for either repetitive use of the same sites for new constructions or completely ruined because of their abandonment or bringing them in use for other purposes after they were vacated. However, the excavated sites give us fair idea about the technological advances of those times.

As the complexities of the settled life grew, the languages too took mostly independent course based on the linguistic accumulations from the wandering past. However, it clearly seems, this caused to give rise to the net of the languages. Many words, concepts, technological features, epithets, personal names to plant names, those occur in the various pan-territorial languages have roots in the remote past of the human being. We cannot solve the mystery of such linguistic similarities by formulating “migration” theories but by the simple understanding of the human past. Agriculture and related technical inventions added to the vocabulary. Numerics must have advanced in this era. In a way we can call it a linguistic explosion!

Anyway, human beings gradually started settling around 10000 BC. The archeological proofs of early settlements and agriculture have been surfaced almost everywhere. In India, Kenoyer has shown from the archeological finds that the people of Indus-Ghaggar Civilization traded with the people of Iranian plateau since 7000 BC. Kenoyer asserts that, “….These data indicate that foragers were present in the exact locations where we later see the emergence of settled agro-pastoral communities during the Early Food Producing Era (7000-5500 BCE) and the Regionalization Era (5500-2800 BCE).” In Gangetic plains the agrarian settlements have been discovered that too date back to the same period, or even earlier to that. In Zagros region of Iran archeologists have recently discovered the proofs of agriculture that dates back to 12000 BC. In short, we can surmise that by 10,000 BC, barring few tribes, human being was almost settled on the globe in the respective territories. We do not trace any massive migrations taking place after that. Migrations are not a new phenomena occurring in the human world. It is widely assumed that from the ancient times, human race has been moving from one place to other in the search of the food. Geographical spread of the human beings is attributed as a reason to this. However, the human beings had started settling down in different regions in the Mesolithic period (approx 15,000 years BC).

C.K. Chase-Dunn (Institute for Research on World-Systems (IROWS), University of California, states, “The earliest sedentary societies were of diversified foragers in locations in which nature was bountiful enough to allow hunter gatherers to feed themselves without migrating. These first villagers continued to interact with still nomadic peoples in both trade and warfare. The best known of these is the Natufian culture of the Levant, villagers who harvested natural stands of grain around 11,000 years ago. In many regions, the largest villages had only about 250 people. In other regions, there were larger villages and regions with different population densities were often in systemic interaction with each other.”

The ambitious warring tribes might have moved to make military expeditions, but largely the populations did not leave their habitats, even if they were subjugated and enslaved. They, in course of the time, changed their settlement patterns, vacated earlier settlements to move in new and advanced ones. Towns and villages and temples or sanctuaries gradually were developed. So far we have found one ancient sanctuary at Gobelki Tepe dating back to 10^th to 8^th millennium B.C. This does mean that collective concepts of religion started developing much earlier in almost every region in unique way.

 Food produce in fertile lands, with help of the advanced farming equipments and innovative ideas of canals, grew to phenomenal extent. The huge granaries found in IVC stands proof for the surplus agricultural produce. Trade of the artifacts, food and other agricultural products, such as cotton, begun with other distant civilizations. Indus trade with Mesopotamia, Middle East and Iran is established by the archaeological finds.

It can be said that the cultural contact with Semitic and so-called Indo-European speaking territories through trade was simultaneous.  It is a wonder, even then the scholars want to deny Semitic influence over North-Western languages and claim influence of the so-called IE languages. It is equally possible that the North-Western languages of those times had some influence on Semitic languages. However, such influence means only the exchange of vocabulary and some cultural concepts. The fundamental cultural traits, including languages remained independent.

The civilizations thrived, reached their heights of the glory and because of the climatic changes in the end of second millennia BC the downfall began almost everywhere. It gave rise to the political upheavals. It forced people to change their settlement and life patterns. The centers of the urbanizations changed and moved to the wet regions. It does not mean the people from arid regions moved to occupy new urban centers. They largely remained in the same regions adapting to the changed socio-economic conditions.

The overview of the human journey tells us that the territorial and regional consciousness in human being has very early traits. The regions they occupied from early era left inerasable imprint in his lingo-ethnic identity. It has nothing to do with the racial concepts. It was land that helped evolve the human psychology and thus culture. The early settlement patterns of the human being, though superficially same, in course of the time, we find, every civilization acquired its own recognizable distinct face. 

After rise of the agrarian era, territorial languages did not remain same. The religious practices and the pantheons of the deities did not remain the same. Mythologies too took independent paths, though the basic elements, such as division between good and evil and their epithets had roots in their wandering past. Languages too started evolving independently and rapidly, based on the accululated vocabulary and rudimentary grammar of his territorial past. Ways of expressions changed with civilizations to civilizations. The civilizations albeit were in contacts with each others , mostly for trade and in case of war like situations, but one civilization could not erase the cultural past of the other, except notable exchanges. We find the polity had developed to the extent that the written treaties between the two parties to the war used to be signed. We have the proof of a peace treaty that was signed between the Egyptian pharaoh Ramses II, and the Emperor Hattusilis III that dates back to 1258 BC. Though the earlier treaties have not been surfaced as yet, in all probabilities many must have been executed across the globe prior to this.  

What we can understand from above is that the global cultures started evolving about hundred thousand years ago. We find the traces of his advances from, though rare, the findings from the ancient past. For example we have 75000 year old engraved ochre chunks from South Africa (Blombos), we have 60000 year old engraved ostrich eggshells from South Africa, and also we have from all over the world the paintings in rock shelters that contain geometric symbolism, suggesting the symbolic communication beginning from about 40000 years ago. The symbols are repetitive and believed by the scholars that they must have been communication symbols. Bhimbetka in Madhya Pradesh of India too is a fine example of this where we find the early human being expressing through art depicting day to day affairs, including his hunting expeditions and dances.

The territorial sense in humans must have evolved around 40,000 years ago or even earlier when they limited their wandering within known geographies instead of roaming directionlessly. They must have acquired knowledge of the regions, flora-fauna, animals, birds, climates and the tribes as friends, foes or neutral, within the territories they knew.

From archeological evidences we can be certain that the population distribution across the globe almost was completed by this time. Later on the social cultures thrived almost independently. They were aware of the neighboring and distant reachable civilizations, with which they traded the essentials even risking the lives. We have proofs that the Indus people, known as Melluha to the Mesopotamians, had established their trade colonies in Mesopotamia. Such meaningful migrations and settlements in foreign lands may have been a global practice of those times.

In course of the human history, we do not know for sure exactly when faculty of languages emerged in human being. Many tend to think that this phenomenon was accidental. However, we can safely say that when cultural expression begun in form of the dance, rituals, painting and making meaningful things from the natural resources, the faculty of language was present. Rather, we can say that the first utterance of a meaningful word started civilizing the human being. This was global phenomena. It could not be the case that some hypothetical group developed the language first and then caused its spread.  However the present theories propose the same illogical logic with confidence.

The Indo-European language theorists often claim that the invention of the spoke-wheeled chariots and taming of the horses by the PIE speakers made them superior over others and their aggressions or migrations resulted in the formation of the IE language family. This is a reckless, thoughtless and unhistorical claim that stands upon a flimsy hypothesis. This is against the history of the civilizations. Rather net of the languages was already formed when the earliest civilization era had begun! The tribes were sharing basic vocabularies for over the millenniums while they were on move within the known territories before they finally had started to settle and there onwards took largely independent course of the linguistic developments! Since the basics were almost similar, developed with joint efforts, finding such common elements couldn’t have been a surprise at all! The net of the languages was already in place.  Hence, the so-called Proto-Indo-European language family needed not any dispersion of some group of the people that had supposedly developed that language independently to spread it with the migration. History of the languages is far older than the assumed date of the so called PIE speakers’ migration. It is an imaginary theory created with political supremacist motives, nothing else. Rather we need to find, still, why there are different linguistic and cultural groups across the globe?

However, we can note from the excavated pre-history that the civilizations were prospering almost in every continent and territories and regions almost simultaneously exhibiting their own creations and innovations. Every civilization had their own face and characteristics to speak of, exhibiting their distinct identities. They had their independent religious beliefs and most importantly the languages. Roots of the languages, though common in every territory, the languages of the every civilizations differed significantly, almost unintelligible except of those spoken in neighboring regions. Also we can find overlapping zones of the languages and as we proceed deeper in some regions, like an island, we come across some entirely different language which cannot be classified in the neighboring language groups.

Not only this, with every region, we find significant changes in the cultures, no matter whether linguistic or architectural or religious beliefs, though largely they fall under a common single civilization. The pronunciation patterns too change significantly, no matter even if they are speaking same dialect! We can notice easily the patterns of the lifestyle changing with region to region. Many factors associated with the culture thus can be observed taking noticeable forms with the change of the geographical region.

But we have to think on, why so?

Why we do find closely adjoined regions exhibiting distinct cultural features including languages? Why cultural patterns must be changing though the people are of same ethnicity and language families? Why, although the religion is same, the regional religious beliefs, practices and the way of the expressions do change? Why some of the mythologies regionally too differ significantly though they have single source of origin?

We have seen the journey of the civilizations, though brief and cursory, has ancient roots. The known civilizations of the globe exhibit their independent expressions through religions, architectures, settlement patterns and languages. Such distinctive features of the cultures still do survive in the era of the globalization.

There shouldn’t be any doubt that, it certainly is the regional psychology of the people that exhibits through their cultural behaviors. We need to examine what makes the people of the certain regions to behave culturally different than the other regions. Why the languages do change significantly with the regions. Rather, we shall probe further whether every region has its own qualities that decide human expressions or whether the present linguistic theorists are right.

* 

Chapter 2

Culture and General Psychology

The culture is material and spiritual expression of the people. Whatever human society converts from the natural resources to useful objects and develops ways of expressions forms part of the culture. Rather culture is an artificial creation of the material utilities those are expressed through the human mind and action. Culture is not just individual but a collective expression. Cultural psychologists often discuss on how the culture enters into psychological process of the individuals. But let us not forget here that the culture plays dual role…culture influences psychological processes of the individuals and the collective psychologies make out the culture. So, in a way, both are interdependent.

As per the linguists and psychologists, the language is an innate need of human race, it is adequate to consider that the language evolutions, their exterminations and re-evolutions or blend of own languages with other languages of neighboring people with social mutations has been the constant process in human societies of the globe. We find similar words having hypothetically similar roots in different languages and conclusions of the scholars that one language influenced the other have marred our linguistic history. We find several similar words in most of the languages but the meanings attached to them are opposite or entirely different.

“Language consciousness is probably identical with every human meta-consciousness and may therefore play a significant role in the control processes effected in the human subject by consciousness,” states Jerzy Banczerowski, a noted linguist.

We have seen in the last chapter how the human civilizations did evolve through the long passage of the time. We also have seen that the migrations or expansions do not solely cause the spread of the languages. Though almost all the cultural phenomena’s are almost contemporary in every age, the ways of expressions in different regions are remarkably vary. We can attempt to attribute such differences to the available resources in every region. For example, the Indus region lacked in the stone quarries for the alluvial plains, created by the perennial river sediments. They used initially mud bricks, followed by burnt bricks in later times to build their homes and fortifications. Human being used the natural resources available around to meet his needs. We find stone used to build ancient settlements wherever it was abundantly available. Still, we find the settlement patterns differ significantly. It is pertinent to note here, using available natural resources is not a surprise, but the way he distinctly used them to meet his needs is surprising. The archaeological proofs of same era across the globe exhibit how one civilization differed from another. The settlement patterns of BMAC are not same as found in Andronovo culture or any other culture contemporary to it. Though Indus civilization was in close contact with Mesopotamians, we do find from archaeological remains that the settlement patterns and construction styles significantly differed. Both the civilizations used seals, still there is remarkable difference in both, in style, symbolism as well as in language and script.

The religious beliefs, languages, architecture, mythologies and literature…we do not find any close relationship except some vague similarities in their original core. Though some mythical or folk stories have travelled across the regions, they have been modified everywhere, adding the elements of local psyche. It is human mind, sometimes thought to be functioning universally alike, but except for a need to express and make life comfortable, in every geological region, it courses in its own way. The regional or territorial expressions differ significantly. What exactly makes this change in psychological patterns?

For example, a myth of Vritra slaying is considered to be very antique and must have its origin when human being was still in savage state. However, the myth has taken different shapes though the core of the myth remained the same, i.e. God or Man slayed a dragon.  Verethragna of Avesta is thought to be associated with “Vritrahan” of Rigveda as both the words seem to be closely related, but the myths associated with them are not. Avesta’s similar myth is associated with Traitana. Similar myth in Greek mythology appears in the form of Hercules-Cacus form.

What this would mean that the myth has travelled across the regions taking its own local forms. The same would also appear true with the myths from Katha Saritsagar.  M. Gaster states that, “Happily there are no geographical, religious or National boundaries in that land of imagination. The whole mankind dwells therein……..” Further he elaborates that finding the provenance of the fantasies, legends or myths may be impossible for many a places people think alike or the stories travelled from word of mouth by the bards, travelers or soldiers retold in advanced or modified forms.  Vritra slaying myth could be poetic imagination of eternal struggle between good and evil. Interestingly Vritra of Veda is son of Danu, which means water or fog. This myth stands apart from the other myths, though similar in the struggle of a god or man with dragon. World mythologies are filled up with similar stories though the details do differ. Trying to connect them with hypothetical movement of some stock of the people may be wrong as there wouldn’t have been so difference in details and persons/deities associated with the similar-sounding myth. This applies to languages as well, because the way myths are creation or adaptation of the specific psychologies, the basic element, the languages also are creation of the cumulative human psychology.

The question is why languages differ significantly the way myths differ in their construction with change of the regions!

Also, geographic subcultures can be defined with its typical topography, climate and geological characteristics those heavily influence the attitudes and behaviors formed as a result of psychological bounds. An individual moving into a new geographic location will not generally adopt the geographically bound attitudes and behavior. (The Influence of Geographic Subcultures in the United States, Kenneth A. Coney, Arizona State University) This simply does mean that the psychology is closely associated with the region a person lives in. While moving from one to other geographic region, his originally structured psychological patterns hardly do change. How these regional psychological traits do form? We also have seen that the genes carry the regional markers, no matter what percentage remains in course of the time.

Culture and psychologies are interdependent. True. Individuals living in a culture are influenced by their surrounding culture. The mind is impacted by the surroundings he lives in. Culture penetrates his psyche making some influence on his individual behavior. True. Culture and psychology thus is interrelated. However cultural psychologists do not give heed to the major question why a culture develops in specific manner?  Why it becomes so distinct from others? What are the forces those govern the minds of the people living in a particular region and why they generally exhibit their ethos in almost similar way?

We must differentiate here between the individual psychologies and collective psychologies. In a way individual human lives in the ocean of psychologies! Though individual psychology has its dependent special characteristics, they exhibit, in normal way, characteristics of general psychologies of the region.

There are always some common traits those are found in particular set of the people living in common region. Western people, the psychologists agree, are more individualistic. The western psychologists treat psychology as a tool to solve the individuals’ psychological problems. The individualism reflects very well in the psychologists itself. Naturally cultural psychology, though an emerging branch, rather is focused on effects of the cultures on the individual psychologies. Cross-cultural psychologies also tread the same path. However we have to explore the collective psychologies those reflect in overall cultural expressions including languages/dialects and the way they are spoken.

Europeans started thinking of the world, after 16^th century out of their expansionist need of the time. Before, to them, the unknown world was rather mythical. Columbus’ account of the new world he came across is mythical. Megasthanese’ account of India, in third century BC, too was too mythical. Rather mythologizing the material world that they encountered was a mythical phenomenon to them. Rather, we can say, it was almost a universal general psychology to see or express everything in mythical form that was barely or superficially known. However, the patterns of myth-making were not similar everywhere. And those traits still are surviving in human being. 

After era of enlightenment, Europe became technologically advanced and started looking more practically at rest of the world. In a way we can call it a cultural shift. The cultural shift caused by the collective minds those wanted to see the world differently and exploit the world to their benefit. We need to differentiate here between spiritual culture and materialistic culture. Materialistic culture may change with the technological advances or economic prosperities or downfalls, but again the material culture, though utilitarian, the spiritual traits of the culture are too hard to change. However, we have an explanation how spiritual traits are changed and are discussed in next chapters.

In this period Europeans looked at the other people of the globe rather in contempt. They divided the world in races like Semitics, Aryans, Black, brown and yellow. The racial egotism, that always was part of their psychologies exploded because they came at advantageous stage because of technological advances. Actually they had loathed Jews and Muslims from historical times. The religious struggle they had in historical times with Muslims and Jews now changed to racial struggle. Rise of Aryan theory was in fact an outcome of their present technological advances those politically proved the Europeans superior over all other races. The supremacist psychological traits are always hidden in the inferiority complexes those form the part of the subconscious collective psychology. 

The racial categorization of the humans living across the globe was an insane idea, but creation of the Europeans. In a way it was collective explosion of the inferiority complex of the Europeans of 18^th century. It is not yet subsided as still they are on a hunt to search for their original homeland! The people those are confused of their own roots are certainly pitiable! But Aryan Invasion Theory or present Indo-European language Theory and spread of the IU languages are still is a hotly debated issue.

But this phenomenon is directly related with the collective psychology. Every society living in different regions have characteristically distinct psychologies that sometimes clash. Cross-cultural psychologies are responsible for such clashes.

So, considering above points, as the cultural psychologists propose that the culture penetrates individual and responds according to his individual psychology may be correct. “Theory of others” comes true when a cultural group confronts other cultural group/s.

We need to think and elaborate over why, first of all, independent cultural groups evolve? Why the collective identities are needed or developed, no matter even if religious? Religion is one of the parts of the culture. How cultures do change suddenly or gradually? How we can differentiate British people from the Germans? Are their ways of thinking similar?  They are not, we know for sure!

Also there are forced cultures. Forced cultures would mean attack on individual and collective psychologies. We need to think, how a human being would react to such cultural enforcements. Would he adapt to the forced cultures or would create some other distinct cultures with admixture of his own and enforced? Or will he adapt to the other cultures in his own way without changing his thinking patterns?

We must keep in mind here that there is close relationship between the regions of specific geological features of the regions and the cultures developed in their folds. I will show in next chapters that the way of thinking and expressions is interlinked with the geological formations of the regions wherever the particular set of the people live for generations. Superficially geographically connected lands may have entirely different group of language speaking people with their unique culture setting them apart from their close neighbors.

Geological features include geomagnetism, local gravitation, chemistry of the rocks and soil, altitudes and the formations beneath the crust of earth. The people living in the company with these features, eating food yielded from the same soil and drinking water from the rivers and wells that is having flavor of specific dilated minerals/compounds existent in the land that has its own combinations, a result of the specific geology of specific region. All this makes inevitable impact on the physical features and psychology of the people living in specific geologically formed regions. There are sufficient proofs to show relationship between geology and general psychology of the people, which we shall see in next chapters.  But first, let us consider present theories on creation of the languages and their spread.

*

3.

Linguistic Theories

There are various theories those deal with the origin of the languages and their spread. We will take an overview of some most debated theories in academic circles.

Linguistic psychology or psychology of the languages is an interdisciplinary branch that deals with the psychological and neurobiological factors those enable humans to acquire, use, comprehend, utter and produce the language. Its area is limited to cognitive science as it moreover deals with how the language is processed in the brain and the meaning derived and expressed thereof. Moreover, it deals with a major question how the child acquires and comprehends the language. The language production is a factor that deals with how people produce language, either in written or spoken form, which can be comprehended by others. To convey meaning language produced should be rule governed otherwise the language spoken or written may not be able to convey what the speaker intended.

In short, linguistic psychology deals with peripheral objectives but does not try to touch the core of the very subject i.e. origin of the languages. It is limited to the cognitive science and deals with the associated issues about learning and speaking of the languages.

Chomsky believes that the language is an innate faculty of the humans, making them distinct from other animals. He also postulates the universal grammar that makes child understand the complex nature of the language in early age. He also proposed that in remote past some random mutation took place, maybe after some strange cosmic ray shower, which reorganized the brain, implanting a language organ in an otherwise primate brain. Some linguists posited that the languages must have emerged in primates those gradually developed with increase in brain volume over the ages.  Broca's and Wernicke's areas in the brain have been considered to be responsible for the languages. However, it was learned later that various parts of the brain participate while producing and uttering the language, so we cannot point out a specific region of the brain responsible for the language. The fact is brain collectively participates in creation, uttering and comprehending the language with help of the assisting organs. 

There is no doubt that the origin of the languages is mostly attributed to the need of communication. Proponents of continuity theory, such as Pinker, hold that the language is being mostly innate and some hold that it has developed from animal conversation of primates. A few, like Anderson, believe that the language was invented only once and that all modern spoken languages, being descendent, are somehow related to each other.

Though there are various other theories floating around as well, we have taken overview of the major theories those have been prominent at the present. We can easily determine that the main question of the origin remains unanswered because most of the theories are speculative.

Humans have ability to think and produce complex sounds because of his developed larynx. Other animals too have larynx that produces certain meaningful sounds, cognizable with their pitch of sounds and actions. They too pass on certain message, deliver expressions to some extent. Unlike Humans other animals lack in cohesive thinking process and memory that could be a limiting factor for non-development of the languages in other animals. Or also it may be the fact that we the human beings are unable to comprehend the animal language because it might have totally different structure and sound waves indiscernible to us and because it does not need words and grammar but sound frequencies to make their specific language.

It can be postulated that the faculty of thinking emerged first in human brain which helped him to construct meaningful language. Complexity of the language developed with the growing complexities of the life in far later course. We have seen in earlier chapter that the invention of the agriculture forced him to invent new vocabulary and grammar to convey the complex world he newly had entered. His early language suddenly lost meaning but on the foundation of the same roots he expanded his linguistic horizon. He needed, no matter how rudimentary, mathematics as well. With this advancement not only vocabulary grew, the grammar took complex form.

The earliest journey was from sounds coupled with gestures to primary words devoid of any grammar. It sufficed his early needs. Because of developed larynx, he easily could produce or imitate sounds from nature and other animal kind with independent sounds. This must have amazed him at the early stage, which he turned to a useful tool, i.e. language.

Word is a sequence of sounds. How early human could have decided certain sequence of sounds uttered by one delivers some certain meaning? Language is to be understood by others and to the speaker of it, if not, it is meaningless. It cannot make a language in absence of the meaning.

Here we come across the social or collective mind. People living in certain land (or geography) possess a certain set of mind to which we call general psychology. Universal mind made human being to develop languages from his imminent need of survival. But languages did differ because there were sets of the people spread across the globe living in their specific geographical and geological settings. Specific thinking order in human belonging to certain set could have recognized easily what certain series of sounds meant. Language groups differ based on the sequel of the sounds those form words and the grammar. This order is determined by sequence in which the specific people do think. Thinking process of the people living in certain regions determines their language which is always influenced and determined by the geological structures. The relationship between the physical characteristics of the geology and human mind is thus eternally formed that exhibits in the cultural diversities.

Specific order of the thinking depends on the general psychology of the people among whom the particular language is developed. Choices of sequence of sounds to make a certain word that has specific meaning differ from language to language. The order of the words set to make a meaningful sentence, grammar; too do differ because it is influenced by the general psychology of particular set of the people.

The cognitive process of people living together in similar geological and geographical conditions becomes universal though there are definite geographical variations in the languages, to which we call “group languages”. Language is a manifestation of the collective psychology.  With the growing complexities of the life languages become complex, it gets modified, polished, perfected and transformed over the time hence it undergoes various changes. Even today in tribal societies where lifestyle is less complicated their languages too are simple. Even some languages do not need tenses or genders.

 Language is an expression of the inner self of the human being. Word comes later, meaning comes first, or opposite also happens to which we can call innate ability of the human being to process the language. Human thinks and thinking process takes place in biological or neurological language in the brain which later is converted into certain meaningful series of sounds, pauses and full stops. The brain processes it before it is uttered. However we are not aware of the language in which brain thinks and processes the language. However, we can call it “Neurological Language.”

In development of early languages we also find hand of ritualistic needs in development of the languages.

We have little proofs, except material culture, to understand how and what early human could have been thinking. However, around 40,000 years ago, we find cultural explosion taking place across the globe. We have many proofs from the excavated finds to show that elaborate burials, pottery and ornaments were part of their life. The concepts of early beauty and eternal curiosity and threat of the death can be understood from these remnants. From cave paintings of Altamira to Bhimbetka, we can see while fighting with the odds he was entertaining himself with art and dance. Innate need of expressing the self and thinking about life and afterlife is evident from such proofs. Material culture and languages go hand in hand in every human civilization.

Michael Maystadt (Illinois State University) says that around this time anatomically humans started to behave and think like modern humans.

Origin of the language is not an isolated phenomenon. It is a collective process of social mind of the people residing in certain geographical areas. Because it is geography that decides social mind and so its expressions, the language is the cumulative outcome of it. As a universal mind acts the same, every group of the people has developed languages, in their own way. Influence of territorial elements clearly exhibits in human language and culture. In similar territories, adjoining or distant, having common geological features we find different languages, but as their basic structure is somewhat similar, linguists we set it in some or other group of the languages, but this is a misleading attempt.

We have to understand this because it has been constantly postulated that the language families have a single ancestor source language that emerged in the distant past in certain hypothetical tribe to spread later because of the human movements.

Suppose, a group of the people living within the certain geographical boundaries move away to settle in new territories what would be the status of their language? The question is peculiar. Though the fact is the people or tribes wandered in known territories, but there were also some tribes that may have settled in the land beyond to their known horizons. In an order to establish communication they would have learned the local languages that could have impacted their own vocabulary and grammar. Movement of the people is not always a natural instinctive travel but need of the survival. Either they settle in the respective lands permanently or return back to their homeland when they think situation back home is right. If they stay their permanently what happens to their own language or if they come back to their homeland what is change in their language? We have no proof to explain what compelled early PIA speakers to migrate in different directions. We even do not know from where they came to that hypothetical location and hat was their original language. From few skeletal remains we have extracted genes and have formulated a theory that speaks about the linguistic history of a group of people when genes do not tell us what language they spoke!

But, even if we consider the migration theory to be true, first we have to agree that from some place, some group of the people, speaking a certain proto language did move in many directions in batches and at different times. Wherever these groups finally landed, those lands must have been occupied by different groups of the people speaking some kind of their own language. These lands couldn’t be vacant devoid of any population having their own language. To impact the languages of the local people the newcomers must outnumber them or establish a permanent rule over them to enforce language and culture upon them.

If we take the Indo-European group of languages for example, we find its spread right from Europe to most part of Asia. To make settlements in such a vast region, PIE speakers, originally settled in any hypothetical homeland, should be too large in number to impact the languages of the local people spread over that vast region, no matter how they achieve this. Even if they had to invade such a vast territory they would need enough trained manpower to wage wars and subjugate all the populations. Even if we consider this was the case, in batches they migrated in different directions in two or three waves, how could they leave any significant mark to change the basic structure of the local languages, unless they outnumber them? And if they waged wars, subjugated people and enforced their language and customs why there is not even a slightest single proof has yet been surfaced? Could it be possible to cause such drastic change without changing the root psychology of the locals? Even aggressive Islam or the British those ruled half of the globe could not do this! Language of the aggressors can become a second language of the subjugated people, but it cannot completely change the foundation of the local languages. 

Indian case is quite typical. In the Indian subcontinent, there are two distinct language groups, IE and Dravidian. Both the regions speaking two distinct languages are geographically connected… not separated by sea or difficult mountain ranges. We cannot imagine any reason why IE should stop its spread to southward of Maharashtra and leave further regions uninfluenced.

Didn’t IE speakers reach there any time in remote history?  It is not the case. So called IE speakers, whether migrating from original homeland or from North India, sure had reached southern regions. Still, we find no IE impact on those languages except for some exchange of vocabulary.

The surprising fact is, beyond these four Dravidian speaking States, in an island country, Shri Lanka, separated by the sea, is spoken so called IE language. Surprisingly, the people those could not influence the language of geographically connected region could impact the language of the people living in the land far beyond, but not in the land that lay between. This sounds like a fairy tale, isn’t it?

But proponents of the PIE speakers’ migration theories staunchly believe in this wild hypothesis. Some scholars think that the original migrants mingled with the local populations, but left a linguistic genetic mark on the languages of the local people; thereby making them part of the IE speaking group. However, they do not answer, is there any linguistic gene that can pass on language through biological contact? Had it been the case entire world would have become linguistically tattered. This theory is racist and supremacist that mislead the genuine linguistic history of the origin. 

Coming back to the questions, in human pre-history the populations were limited. Human beings had settled in respective regions long before 10,000 BC. They were semi-nomadic for their profession of cattle herding and primal agriculture. In 2013, the archaeologists unearthed evidence of early agriculture at a 12,000-year-old site in the Zagros Mountains in eastern Iran. Mehrgarh site indicates that the human beings of that region knew agriculture 10,000 years ago. There may be some more unearthed sites those would indicate the earliest agriculture on the globe. The fact remains that agriculture helped human being to settle in the respective regions. Kenoyer asserts that, “….These data indicate that foragers were present in the exact locations where we later see the emergence of settled agro-pastoral communities during the Early Food Producing Era (7000-5500 BCE) and the Regionalization Era (5500-2800 BCE).”

Population movements were rare and that too occurring in extreme circumstances, such as climatic disasters or epidemics. There were wars between the tribes, but they too don’t suggest demographic migration of the subjugated tribes. Battle of ten kings, described in the Rig Veda and the battles enumerated in Avesta suggest that either victorious king would enslave the subjugated people or extract heavy ransoms from them. Largely most of the tribes mentioned in the battle of Ten Kings still reside in their respective regions and are known after them.

India has experienced foreign aggressions since known history. From Greeks to Shaka, Hun, Kushan invaded India. Few ruled temporarily, some for several centuries. They too had their own distinct culture and languages. But could they impact on the fundamental linguistic and cultural structure of northern India? There could have been a slight exchange of vocabulary and cultural elements, but it could not change basic soul of the culture and languages. Rather the invaders, including Muslims, adapted to the local languages and cultures, which is evident from the languages and symbols used on the coins of foreign rulers.

So, even if the invaders are superior, they cannot enforce their languages. Albeit human has an innate ability to learn other languages, either for political compulsions or religious studies, but original language do not disappear unless such speakers are too small in the number. The adaptation of any foreign language also shows specific, distinct characteristics. Otherwise, though people can learn as many languages, the basic structure of the own language remains unaffected. The new languages learnt are pronounced in local fashion, not same way they are originally spoken.  Pronunciation of Sanskrit, though a tight artificial language with set rules of the utterance, is pronounced differently in every region of India. The same applies to the English and Hindi.

There have been rule of north Indian kings or emperors on southern States. There have been cultural and commercial exchanges between south and north since the time unknown. Still, we do not find any language impacting the other to change its basic linguistic structure, except exchange of some vocabulary. Such exchanged elements are seen being adopted suitable to the local forms.

The migrations, invasions or rule of some people, thus cannot alter the structure of the languages local people speak. Known examples from the history don’t support this theory. Biological relationship with the group of languages is thus a deliberately nourished hoax. It rather stresses the superiority of some people those migrated and enforced their language upon the local people.

Even in the group language every language falling in the same group significantly differs from others. Every language has its own specialized vocabulary. The group languages are said to be having genealogical relationship or the languages those share common innovations those are not attributed to contact or borrowing. Genealogically related languages present shared retentions, i.e. features of the proto-language. But there are many features in same group languages those are absent in proto or so-called common ancestor language. Still, they find place in certain family because they are said to be established with shared innovations, though not directly descending from the common ancestor of the entire language family. Germanic language is a fine example of this. Germanic language share vocabulary and grammatical features those are believed to be not present in Proto Indo-European language. Rather linguists believe that the innovations took place in proto-Germanic which was a descendent of PIE. 

We can see clearly that the concept of the common ancestor language, shared features and innovations in descendent family languages cannot be the explanation to the formations of a language family. The group languages are categorized by common features those can be artificially reconstructed in some proto language and if not those are simply treated as innovations, but thought to be in descending line with the common ancestor language.

However, such proto-language does not exist today. No one knows what could be the exact form of the languages our distant ancestors spoke. It is reconstructed from the most common words, those are found in the hypothetical language family to ascertain the original or source word/root. This is an artificially constructed language; many a times with the help of computer programs those give different results with different programs and hence mostly become speculative and controversial. Rather the PIE language issue is treated by many scholars as a theoretically disguised racist propaganda.

However, we must admit that there are languages those have some or more common features that form a family. To form a family there is no need of physical movement of the people speaking some kind of proto-language. 

We have seen in the previous chapters that the faculty of languages in human is very ancient and is related to the human psychology. The human genetics too is influenced by the regional characteristics and do carry recognizable regional markers.

Hence, we can define net of the languages to which some call language family, with the help of geological characteristics those influence psychology and language of the people. We do not need to trace it back to the population movements of the past as it has no proof to substantiate language-spread-theories and hence remains controversial.

*

4.

Linguistic Psychology

Mind has physical existence. Mind is related with brain as brain is center of the nervous system. We can precisely say that without brain there cannot be any psychology. Human brain is a very complex system which remains as yet to be understood completely. It is assumed that there are about 86 billion neurons, each connected with ten thousand others. Any physical alteration to the brain causes impact on mind, no matter whether injury or drugs. Human intelligence is connected with evolution of the human brain over the time.

One can say mind is product of the brain. The brain functioning, though complicated, is mostly based on the bio-electric signals. Rather functioning of neurons depends on bio-electricity generated in the body. Mind is overall functioning of the overall excited cells in the brain that varies or fluctuates with several physical reasons and thus changes expressions, moods, understanding etc. It is now proven that body creates electro-magnetic fields as well and also responds to outsider electro-magnetic fields This includes neurons and muscle cells. With magnetic fields many behavioral effects of different intensities have been reported. For example, a pulsed magnetic field originally designed for spectroscopic MRI was found to alleviate symptoms in bipolar patients while another MRI pulse had no effect.

A whole-body exposure to a pulsed magnetic field was found to alter standing balance and pain perception in other studies. From this we can surmise that the human mind (brain) responds to the electro-magnetic pulses as the brain too is a generator of such signals of different intensities.

 It has been observed that sudden changes in geo-magnetism too, such as geomagnetic storms, heavily impact on the minds of the people. It is not that all cells or neurons in the brain excited all the time. There are many centers in the brain those alternatively get activated with need and in response to the outer world; geo-magnetism is one of them.

 Human psychology is closely associated with brain and so the mind. Brain has physical existence that is made of biological cells of variety of combinations. It has specific chemistry, also called as neuro-chemistry, which helps overall functioning of the brain, such as generating movement, speaking, thinking, listening, regulating the systems of the body, and countless others. Chemical changes in the brain, caused intentionally or otherwise, impacts feelings and emotions. The overall thinking pattern of the human being is entirely dependent on the bio-chemical and electro-magnetic activity of the brain. In ordinary course, when there is no sudden change in overall chemistry of the brain, the psychology of the person remains normal.

However, when we say ‘normal psychological condition’, we just want to explain, a psychology that is not disturbing the state of individual mind in question and others. Till the person exhibits accepted norms of the psychology, in thinking and behavior, as similar as others living in his society, the person is considered to be normal, though he may or may not have special qualities.  But general psychology of a Mexican and American cannot be the same. Psychology of the Arab and Indian also cannot be the same. In India alone, geographically connected regions, say like Maharashtra and Gujarat, people have different general psychologies. Rather we can see general psychology or the way of thinking of the people changes with region to region which reflects in their culture. However, before going deep into this issue, we shall focus on the brain.

Brain is a physical entity, as I have already mentioned. Mind is product of it and so the individual psychology. No brain, if minutely analyzed, is identical with other and so the mind and psychology too is not identical. It is brain that gives sense of individuality. Besides genetics, individual brains overall chemical composition is unique. A slightest change in the composition can make transformation in individual psychology. Sometimes it is done with drugs or extra intake of minerals or vitamins.

Barring few, humans cannot consume minerals directly. They are mostly in compound form and in traces. Most of the minerals he gets from his diet. The food that he uses as his diet is produced from some land. The mineral composition in the diet depends mostly in which land it is produced. The water he drinks too consists of natural minerals and its composition too will depend on through which kind of rocks it has flowed and was gathered.

We are well aware that water of some wells is not considered to be potable for its being hard and of odd taste whereas some well carries potable water. And taste of well water will change with well to well and village to village…it is not because there is problem with water but the amount of the minerals diluted in the water and through which kind of rock-veins the water has been flown in to the well. Water will taste according to the diluted minerals and its density. It may remain potable or not. The people drinking water from the wells too consume the same minerals to the given amount those can affect their overall chemistry. This would be in very small quantity, but their physical chemistry will slightly differ than of the people those drink water from different well having different chemical composition.

In cosmopolitan era, we have forgotten many things. But if we probe it will dawn on us that the food grains of certain kind and produced in certain regions had different tastes. Brinjols grown around Krishna River and chilly of Kolhapur had distinct taste and flavor. What brings that? Certainly the mineral distribution in the lands where they are grown! The crop consumes the minerals spread in the soil and gives the distinct flavor. We could taste it and even now.

But just imagine the era, not far back…just few decades ago…the people living in the certain regions used to consume the food grown in the same lands for ages and drank water that had similar mineral composition. They ate same animal those grazed in the lands where grass too contained similar mineral composition.

What would be the effect?

The overall body and thus brain will essentially contain the chemical composition that was in their regular diet. The people living in certain regions, rich with some minerals in soil and devoid of some, show certain genetic deceases. Many deceases occur because of lack of some or other mineral or excess of some minerals. In body (and brain) minerals are in compound form. Chemical imbalance can cause the psychological stresses or disorders. Human genetics too is affected by regional geological differences. The regional genetic marks too are a proof to make our statement true. Otherwise how the scientists could define the regional genes?

Human being is thus, though separate from land, still he always is rooted with the land he lives in.

The overall chemical composition, though differing slightly from person to person, will remain identical in broader sense in every human being in certain region over the time. His genetic structure too will be impacted by the land he lives in.

We have about or over 60 chemicals in the body though as yet we do not know exactly what all of them is doing there is not known to us so far. The reason is roughly about 96% percent of body mass is made up with four elements, i.e. Oxygen, Hydrogen, Carbon and Nitrogen, that too mostly is in water form. Remaining about 4% are the elements that we find in periodic table of elements. Many of them are in such a minor percentage; we just cannot have them measured for they are in immeasurable traces although they are present. We hardly can measure them with accuracy using our modern spectrographs to determine their exact levels in the body. What we get almost is approximation. There are micro-nutrients as well those are at the level of parts per million or less.

However this about 4% part of the overall body composition is responsible for not only our bodies functioning but minds as well. The slightest variation in overall composition of the body causes not only deceases but psychological problems as well. However there is no data available what the correct distribution of this 4% part of minerals is to exact measurements! We have approximate figures estimated or observed for the healthy people. Let us have a look.

The Calcium forms major part of the minerals, i.e. 1.5%. We have observed that in Calcium deficiency state there is an inborn urge in the people to eat soil, chalks or whatever that is calcium rich substance. The urge emerges in mind, subconsciously, that converts it in to the action, unknowing to the individual. He just strives to eat soil though restricted by others.

The elements and their peculiar distribution in the brain would depend on the naturally available resources amongst which he has been raised. It shapes his typical general psychology, similar to all those who live in the similar geographical region while his individual psychology would depend on slightest change in general composition of the brain mass. This will have an effect on individual intelligence and ability to use and comprehend the language. But, essentially individual always exhibit the general psychological characteristics of the people he lives in with peculiar individual signs. As explained above, the geological formations and mineral compositions will have direct impact on the composition of the body and brain of the human and will determine his psychology!

It is a debated issues how a child acquires a complex language. To answer this question, for example, Chomsky says that all children have what is called an innate language acquisition device. His idea that this device has universal syntactic rules for all languages and that this device provides children with the ability to make sense of knowledge and construct novel sentences with minimal external input and little experience, is insufficient to explain the linguistic phenomena. First of all there is no such hypothetical device exists in human being.

The process of learning the language in child becomes easier because his brain is shaped by the composition of similar elements those is responsible to create a cumulative linguistic psychology. Infant will have no problem in acquiring the language because his general linguistic psychology will be the same.

However, this alone does not solve the main question, origin of the languages. Let us probe further.

Psychology and the language

There are many hypotheses about the origin of the language. However, there so far is no agreement on any. Human is the only animal that has the ability to speak. Without this gift humankind would have been in its primordial state even today. But what is the origin of languages? There have been fierce disputes on this issue, so much so that in 1866 Linguistics Society of Paris had banned debate on this issue. Many have tried to search linguistic roots in remote mythologies; the Bible is famous among others. Psychologists have suggested that the language is an innate need of the human mind. But it doesn’t solve the question as to why this innate need emerged only in human being and not other animals? Some have tried to find its origin in the human genetic structure. This is treated as the hardest problem in science.

Without going into the various aspects of the debate and multiple theories, we will have an overview of this problem and try to find whether there can be any solution to this problem or not.

We have to agree with the supporters of the Continuity theory that the languages didn’t originate all of sudden. It must have been a gradual process, from simple to complex. It is a natural process and there is no reason to disagree with it. Some theories suggest that languages did not originate to establish dialogue with others but to express. Discontinuity theory suggests that the languages must have originated at some stage during the process of evolution as a sudden event. Other theories relate the origin of the languages with primordial utterances. Sounds are symbols and to understand that symbolism in any given language which forms or conveys a certain meaning which is understood and reacted over in same sound symbolism is the language. But how human being achieved that ability to use sound symbols as a mean to convey remains as yet a mystery.

In human evolution, there are many stages. Some are missing links. It is not that it was unidirectional evolution. The process begins with hominids and halts with modern human species.  It is suggested that Neanderthal man has an ability to create complex sounds. Also, it is suggested that there could have been interbreeding between Neanderthal man and Homo-sapiens. Whether Neanderthal man extinguished from the face of the earth as he could not compete with Homo-Sapiens or whether they mingled with each other is a question that is not satisfactorily solved.  If both the species had an ability to speak, we can infer, if they interbred, the genes of the language too got mixed to give way to the future linguistic formations.

The language is mostly in spoken form which also is written in symbols to which certain sounds are denoted. But the first thing is sound. Human species have the larynx that has ability to produce complex sounds with the help of the tongue and mouth. We find no other animal have the larynx of such ability. Larynx also could have been evolved with the growing need of the human being.

Language always is in the mind. When in mind it doesn’t have any visible symbol. It is a constant flow of temporal feelings, thoughts and expressions. The language of the mind could be far different, beyond our comprehension. They are later translated to us in the sound or symbol language that we know. When needed, we express it through the series of sounds, whether vocal or written.  So this is the basic process of the languages.

It is assumed that the processing of the language is interdependent between various centers in the brain.  Not a single center is responsible for its origins and development. We can see that this doesn’t help us to solve the problem of origin.

We have to understand human being has an ability to give meaning to the visible world, sounds and psychological process that is constant. Let us also assume that the natural limitations to survive have been compensated with intellect. The primordial humans must have gone through the terrific conditions for survival. However, we just cannot imagine now how he would have taken those circumstances to pave way through them to enable him to control them. The explosion of linguistic qualities in the human brain could be a sudden event that may have taken place at a very early stage of evolution.

It has been argued from fossil records that Neanderthal man had larynx that could produce sufficient sounds to make a speech. Cave paintings and artifacts shows that he was quite expressive. The argument that, Neanderthal man must have some kind of primitive language, can be taken seriously though we will never know what kind of language he spoke.

Language couldn’t have emerged just out of imitation of babbling. The quality of human species is he has intense feelings and an urge to express. The similar sound patterns to express specific feelings like love, commands, warnings, challenging, hunger etc.  Within a tribe could have made first language. So feelings, thought and language could have the close relationship.

However, the sound patterns to express similar feelings could have differed significantly in different geological conditions. There could have been exchanges but while adopting any vocabulary, every tribe either changed its original sound pattern or rendered different meaning as their innate psychology permitted.

This is because the geological and geographical environment had major hand in the development of their own and adopted vocabulary and grammatical patterns. The evolution of the language has always been influenced by the specific general psychology of the people living in certain geographical regions. Though early human being was nomadic, his roaming was in his known periphery of the geography. We have to understand how geography is closely connected with the language. 

Language was not certainly an innate need of the human being. Innate need for him was survival against all odds. He selected his way of survival by making bands and coordinated efforts. And in process of doing so essentially he needed initial language to effect coordination and action. Without language it would be impossible, no matter how rudimentary the language would be!

There also are bands of other animals like foxes, antelopes and monkeys. They too have rudimentary sound-languages. They use it to caution others when danger is imminent. They utter differently when lovemaking, or just responding to others. They have a language of some rudimentary kind that is not comprehended by us. But they lack (or we think so) in developed vocal chords and so the brain capable enough to process the sounds further. Human species have crossed these hurdles in process of the evolution for his imminent need of survival.

Thus language is product of human psychology. To meet this need his larynx and ability to process sounds and attach certain meaning to express evolved faster. The psychology is related with how the mind functions and mind is solely dependent on our brain to which we yet to have understand fully. However, development of a complex brain with added capabilities to perform larger functions, such as analyzing sounds, understand meaning and delivering same sounds while expressing the same action, have caused development of the language in every geographical region where human delved. And though the process was similar, the development was unique everywhere.

The major question here is, if human species is unique and same, why there are over six thousand languages in the world? Why people of certain region speak some language and different in adjoining region? Why some sounds are missing in some languages whereas they are most prominent in the languages spoken in adjoining regions? For example some languages have retroflexes and some are devoid of them.

Why there is not universal language if human species have everything in common? Why there are so many groups of the languages and several hundred branches of every group?

We will have to deal with this question more elaborately because some theories wide in circulation have misused the fact for supremacist political reasons, though it is not a good science.

To conclude here, we have to check it up first the psychology of human species that is instrumental in origination and control of the language. Psychology is overall functioning of the brain that is instrumental in deciding the priorities. And priorities of survival against all odds decide how to use the available integral resources causing further evolution through modifications. The evolution of the brain and associated organs must have been a process that must have taken toll of the millions in the rout to achieve the utmost possible qualities.

It may have been continued process or discontinued or it could have been developed through interbreeding of the different human-like species of ancient times. We have no any concrete evidence as yet what did happen in those times, but the fact remains that we have language. Our psychology governs the language we speak. Our organs, such as larynx and jaws, decide how it would be uttered. With region to region we find these physical features do change along with others. Physical features are governed by the climate and geography of the people they live in over generations. Mexican accents would not be same as of the New Yorkers. The slightest difference in general physiology would make noticeable difference in pronunciation patterns as well.

We have different languages classified in different groups. We have the languages classified under one group and yet they are incomprehensible to the man who speaks the language belonging to the same group. In fact though there is universal human with all the similar physical characteristics there is no similar language in the world.

We have to first account for such changes.

The fact is there are changes in the same languages with regions to regions, though they collectively are labeled as some language. Every language for that matter is group of dialects. The group of the languages represents the languages those have some common morphological features. To be a part of any group of the languages geographical closeness is not warranted. 

And it is prominently claimed that the spread of some language is because of the population movement in remote past. It is claimed that Proto-Indo-European language speakers were settled at some place and for reasons unknown migrated in different directions and wherever they reached PIE did spread.  Though there is dispute over what the original homeland of PIE speakers was, there so far is no dispute over the spread of the language to form a distinct group.

Though I strongly object to this hypothesis on the scientific and logical grounds, for time being let us be with this theory taking it a fact for time being.

If some people, speaking some proto-language,  spread for reasons, wherever they went the basic structure of the languages spoken in the areas they settled must be the same. But is it a case? Linguistic biology is sometimes invoked while proposing this theory of IE group of the languages. If this considered true, I have following points: 

1)      The PIE languages, after spread, formed regional varieties. How the regional variation process would have taken place?

2)      Though unknown is the basic structure of the PIE language the affinities in the group languages is striking in some cases whereas vague in many. They painfully have to establish the relationship with artificial reconstructions of the proto-language.

3)      The differences are notable with region to region. Such as the IE’s spoken in European countries and in India in different regions.

4)      There are intermediary blocks where unrelated to surrounding group languages are spoken. Brahui, Munda etc. are the examples those are surrounded by IE language speakers. Their so called isolation or migration from some place is not an answer to this vital problem. If PIE language spread across the globe with a process why the same couldn’t have been applied in these odd cases?

To sum up, even if we accept the group of the language theory, effected by migrations of some intelligent human species, we do not know whether they were Homo sapiens or Neanderthals and what are remains of those species. The racial views imposed upon the linguistics have distorted the science of the languages that blocks our vision to see the truth.

We find there are regional varieties, somewhere very striking somewhere vague. Not that the group languages are intelligible to all those who are part of that so called group. And this doesn’t solve a question, why there are regional varieties of the same language and why it did take separate path?

I think this is the major question linguistic scientists should give more attention to. A most probable answer offered is, wherever PIE speakers went they mingled with local populations, borrowed and improvised their vocabularies and the language grew thereafter unique and yet biologically related with PIE language. If we consider this too is true, we have to assume that wherever PIE speakers went subjugated local languages. They borrowed from them but kept basic structure of their own language undisturbed. Because of the local languages PIE bred with, it became different and yet it could maintain its own superiority.

But we must understand here that in disguise of PIE language expansion theory nothing new is told to us than what Aryan race Theory was telling. In a way we are stalled here. They are telling us the same story in different words. It doesn’t talk of psychology of the language. Rather it believes that the languages can be imposed, so much so that the native languages can lose their original basic structure. But the fact about IE languages is that they too then have lost their original structure, whatsoever hypothetically it was!

We need to look in to the problem of the languages from different point of view. The need arises because the present postulations are lame in their arguments and proofs. Spread of some language speaking people to effect group of the languages across the territories is simplified answer to a complicated question. It does not take into the consideration linguistic psychology.

It runs away from the basic question, how some language that was so powerful to influence others could have been originated and among whom and where? The original geography of the PIE language is as yet uncertain and hypothetical. There cannot be the proof from material remains of the culture as to what languages the people were speaking in those times. The available proofs, the language of Avesta, Rig Veda and the treaty of Bogazkoy or Horse Manuel of Kikkuli tells us far less if not more. Language and contents of Avesta and Rig Veda tells us just their geography being close and that language of Rig Veda, though close to the Avesta, is significantly modified later. The language of Bogazkoy treaty tells us that some deities and demons and numeric from the east were known to them. We cannot take it as a solid proof of Aryan Language expansion theory. It doesn’t tell us why in certain close geographies IE could not spread! Geographically the Semitic language speakers and Dravidian language speakers are very close and they have interactions from millenniums and yet we find there is no remarkable influence of IE languages on them.

To conclude this chapter we can sum up as:

1)      Language is psychological phenomenon supported by physical organs.

2)      Though genetically human being is same (The variation amounts for just 0.50%) the languages show variety of differences. There are over 6000 languages in the world distributed in several families.

In fact I will show in the next chapter how regional Local geological features govern the general psychology of the people that reflects in local culture and the language.  No migration of some band can effect the spread of the language. The supremacist theories of the races and languages should see the end hereafter.

As we have seen in previous chapters, if any better language would have emerged it only could be a complex society. We also have seen the agriculture and urbanized society only could have developed complex or advanced language as compared to pastorals of the past. Languages do differ with every society with change in their geological and geographical changes.

*

5

Migration theories and the languages

First we have to admit that the material culture of the human beings walk hand in hand with the language the people of that particular culture do speak. There are various views about the origin of the languages and their spread. There are almost 445 languages in Indo-European language category out of which 313 languages are sub-grouped under Indo-Iranian head. The spread of these languages is vast that covers almost from North-West China to Europe region. We are aware that the origin of the Aryan theory is in some similarities in Vedic Sanskrit and European languages those were noticed by the western scholars which was later theorized to the Indo-European language theory. Without going in to the racial aspects of the theory and its fatal impact on the global civilization, let us agree that there is the IE language group theory which consists of all the characteristics of the Aryan Race theory. An IE language theory ultimately means and is aimed to prove the same thing and that is Aryan invasion.

The theory assumes that there were the people, settled at some hypothetical place, among whom a proto-Indo-European language originated. PIE speakers later dispersed in waves to speared IE languages and their superior culture wherever they went. It also is assumed that the IE people were inventors of the chariots and were first to domesticate the horses. They could invade and conquer the lands because of their superiority coupled with their innovative invention. Michael Witzel calls them the “Vedic Tanks”!  However, in absence of the proofs to support the invasion theory, the linguists devised migration theory to replace earlier while keeping the notion of superiority of the IE ancestors intact.

In this regard, Nicholas Kazanas states, "But invasion is the substratum of all such theories even if words like ‘migration’ are used. There could not have been an Aryan immigration because (apart from the fact that there is no archaeological evidence for this) the results would have been quite different. Immigrants do not impose their own demands or desires on the natives of the new country: they are grateful for being accepted, for having the use of lands and rivers for farming or pasturing and for any help they receive from the natives; in time it is they who adopt the language (and perhaps the religion) of the natives. You cannot have a migration with the results of an invasion."

In this matter Kazanas’ remarks need to be taken seriously, though, all scholars at the least unanimously agree that there was no invasion; however, they assert there was migration in the waves in India and elsewhere to explain the similarities in the languages spoken across the IE world. They didn’t think for a moment that the movement of the people is not required to form the group or net of the language, if at all it is to be called a group!

The linguistic groups are made out of comparative study of the grammatical texture, sound-sequences, similarities in the words etc. It is thought that the group languages are developed from the common ancestry. Comparative methods are applied to decide whether certain language belongs to some group or other and also the attempts have been made to restructure the proto-language using modern devices. In a way the group languages can be describes as a tree with many branches. However, the linguists have proved that the German languages spoken in the eastern and western Germany do not belong to the same tree. Linguists hence have sub-grouped the European languages like Italo-Celtic, Greco-Armenian and Greco-Aryan to solve the complicated issue of the languages.  The linguists admit that there are not enough proofs available to show direct mother-daughter relationship between Proto Indo-European and present IE languages.  

The oldest proofs those are considered to be foundation for the PIE theory are the language of Avesta, Rig Veda, Hittite treaty and horse training manual of Kikkuli. Also there is brief Greek epigraph called Diplon script which belongs to 800 BC.  Here, we must not forget that the time of the Rig Veda is uncertain and so of the Avesta because both were committed to the writing in late era. Also, both have undergone significant linguistic changes through the passage of the time. There are no proofs to pin the exact time of both the scriptures except hypothetical conjectures. The oral tradition through which Rig Veda is said to be preserved unaltered has proven to be a myth. Only Hittite treaty is attested to 1380 BC, but irony is the treaty itself is not at all in so called IE language.  Among others, the treaty invokes some Iranian deities as well as demons those with efforts can be linked with the IE languages. Except for numerics and some technical terms the Kikkuli horse training manual too is in Semitic language.  Appearance of some similar personal names, numeric, deities and demons in some distinct culture cannot become a solid foundation to prove presence of the people speaking some hypothetical proto-language.

Here we can take an example of the language of the Rig Veda which is considered to be oldest IE language. It also is claimed that IE language entered India through migrating Aryans. It is still a speculation as to how much migrating Aryans were in number. The myth of Videgh Mathava preserved in Shatapatha Brahmana suggests that a small group of Vedic Aryans accompanied by priest Gautama Rohugana left their original habitat and marched towards Indus basin to find shelter. This indicates clearly that the number of those Aryans was small.

Also, it is now clear that the language of Rig Veda got significantly changed during rearrangement, editing and compilation process. Witzel says that the language of Avesta is far older than the language of Rig Veda. While refuting Out of India Theory claimed by Vedicists, he states, “....On the other hand, while we can observe some changes common to all Iranian languages (s > h,p,t,k + consonant >f, •&, x + cons., etc.), Avest. often is quite archaic, both in grammar and also in vocabulary, while Ved. seems to have progressed much more toward Epic and Classical Sanskrit (loss of injunctive, moods of the perfect, aorist, etc.). The Avest. combination within a sentence of neuter plural nouns with the singular of the verb is hardly retained even in the other older IE languages. The Old Avest. of Zaraftustra, thus, is frequently even more archaic than the RV and therefore simply too old to have moved out of India after the composition of the RV (supposedly, before 2600-5000 bce)." (The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Evidence and Inference in Indian History edited by Edwin Bryant, Laurie L. Patton, Psychology Press, 2005, pp 366-367)

Now, if Rigveda and Avesta (Gatha) were composed during same period, the language of Rig Veda should have been similar to the Avestan language, but this is not the case. Vedic language did not remain original when Vedics came and settled in India. The Vedic language is heavily influenced by Prakrits and by the Dravidian to some extent. The regional varieties of Prakrits also can be seen entered in Vedic language. We do not know what original Rig Veda was as in all probability content, order and original message has been edited or altered. Even Rig Veda available to grammarian Panini was not the same as we have today because it has again undergone sound changes in course of the time. What Rig Veda is available today is in hybrid language.

This could only happen because the migrant Vedic Aryans got influenced by the local language, they could not impact local languages as commonly is thought. It is preposterous to claim migrants influenced original Indian languages. So group of the language theory effected by the migrants is baseless.

Other group classified is Semitic group of the languages, spoken in North Africa, Western Asia and surrounding regions. This is the only language group that has attested written proofs beginning from 2800 BC. The first written (and hence unaltered) religious text is available in form of the Pyramid Text. Though the hype is all about PIE language and superiority of its authors, there is no conclusive evidence to support the existence of such certain group of the people those together located at some hypothetical place and their subsequent dispersions and conquests. Even the Rig Veda and Avesta do not support this claim. What they have at hand to make out a big claim that is some similarities in the IE languages, nothing else.

It is a fact that if thought linguistically, there exist group languages those again branch out in the sub-groups. Even if we consider ‘Out of Africa model’ to be true as claimed, it does not satisfactorily answer why there would be different language groups if the human being belongs to the same ancestry? Also, though a language belongs to the certain group, why it should be unintelligible to the people speaking other language belonging to the same group?

It will be insane to think that the human being invented the words scientifically devising the roots first. The words have been developed further, attained new or opposite meaning or lost in the course of the time. The science of the words or language follows later. There are many languages those do not have any grammar, still they have some certain harmonic order that can deliver the intended meaning, no matter how limited it may be.

It is considered that the every word has root and it can be the basis for restructuring the proto-language. The root in language is either a base word, or a part of a word to which affixes are added. Or, it is the part left after affixes have been taken away. Technically, it is the smallest unit which carries meaning: it cannot be reduced into smaller units. With reverse efforts the root can be traced out but then the question is, are they of any help? The Nairuktas (Indian etymological treaties) command that if a word fails to derive meaningful root then abandon the grammatical rules and go by the meaning suggested by the word itself! Obeying the command the etymologists like Yaska and others have found etymologies of the many words whose roots do not support them. For example, the word “Vadhu” (Bride) has the root “Vadh” (murder) so the root is useless to determine the etymology of the word Vadhu. What to be done then? Find nearest root “vah” (To carry) which suggests nearest meaning of the word “Vahu”, the girl is carried to the husbands home hence called Vadhu, bride. Of course this is forceful etymology! There are many words like “Agni” those doesn’t have any certain etymology. The fact to be understood is the words did not emerged scientifically using the roots. Meanings attached to the word keep on changing and there hardly is any way to know what meaning the certain word delivered when it was invented. So, though on a base sound a group of words can be made, the root in itself will remain ambiguous and may not match the meaning of the word. This is why many scholars do not believe in the reconstruction of the proto language on mere hypothetical ground when the roots and the words do not agree with the meanings they want to derive to prove their migration theories.

The horse and the chariot in itself is a very flimsy foundation to make out a big theory. David Anthony states that it is impossible to know who invented the chariot and domesticated the horse first! As Edward Pegler states that few words in IE languages are attempted to connect with the chariot by reconstructing the root, the etymologies have proved to be futile exercise as none of it gives the exact meaning what is expected from the word chariot. Even if it is considered that the PIE etymologies for chariot are true, it does not prove that they were the inventors of the chariot. In fact, Nicholas Kazanas, to take Indus time significantly back, tries to prove that the Vedic “Ratha” meant just wagon or cart and not chariot.

Some linguists have tried to connect spread of the IE languages with invention of the agriculture.  If this is the case then we will have to agree that the agriculture was first invented in Anatolia and it was spread with the expansion of the PIE people! This will be funny hypothesis because PIE people were not alone inventors of the agriculture! IE languages mostly lacks in the agriculture related vocabulary. Vedic people were pastoralists. Sanskrit didn’t have a word for Plough hence they borrowed “Langal” from Dravidian or some other language. The fact is the cart, wagon, chariot, fire, agriculture and many other inventions cannot be related to some hypothetical super-intelligent human group. The spread of the languages too cannot be solely attributed to the migrations of the people.

Most importantly, as yet the PIE homeland issue remains hotly debated and controversial issue as there simply is no agreement on it. They also are not sure exactly when the PIE language arose. The estimates range from 2000 BC to 8000 BC. Recent study published in “Science” (Feb. 15) implies that the Steppes of Russia and Ukraine could be the homeland of the PIE speakers and that the migration started about 4500 years ago.

What genetics say?

The genetics too have been used to explain the spread of the languages. In fact genetics is to know the human ancestry and not the languages they spoke. Out of Africa theory is the product of the modern genetics, which has been objected too, however, we will not entangle ourselves in that endless debate. But the fact remains that the genetics too have been used to explain migrations of the PIE speakers’. Spencer Wells states that these are tenuous efforts to link migrations and languages. Genetic patterns do not provide clear support to the proposed model.

There have been several genetic research papers those deal with genetics and PIE languages. The report appearing in “Science” (Feb. 15) is based on the research of a large team of geneticists led by David Reich and Iosif Lazaridis of Harward Medical School. The DNA samples suggest that the Yamnaya people (DNA obtained from 4 skeletons) could have moved from Steppes 4500 years ago. This paper claims to have connected two far-flunged material cultures to specific genetic signatures. The report states that the team says they spoke a form of Indo-European language. Earlier it was considered that the origins of PIE were 6000 years ago. To meet this gap, hypothetically, it is being proposed that this may be secondary migration!

Another report published in ‘Nature’ too deals with the genomics and spread of the languages. A large team led by Morten E Alentoft examined about 101 sampled ancient individuals from Europe and Central Asia. They also used the archeological evidences of chariot burials (2000-1800 BC) to find the migration pattern. The report relies on the hypothesis of the linguists that ‘the spread of Indo-European languages must have required migration combined with social or demographic dominance and this expansion has been supported by archeologists pointing to striking similarities in the archeological record across western Eurasia during the third millennium BC. The genomic evidence for the spread of the Yamnaya people from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe to both northern Europe and Central Asia during the early Bronze Age corresponds well with the hypothesized expansion of the IE languages.’

However, report agrees that the genomics cannot find which language people spoke. Also we must note here that the cultures do not expand only with the migrations of the people. Practice of the Horse/chariot burials across the civilizations cannot be attributed solely to the movement of particular set of the people.

The major objection on the above report is that it is heavily dependent on sequencing of a very few samples.  The Yamna culture was nomadic and was found in Russia in the Ural region, the Pontic Steppe dating back to 3600-2300 BC.   It is also known as the Pit Grave Culture, the Ochre Grave Culture and feeds into the Corded Ware Culture. This was not the independent culture but was admixture of East European or Caucasus hunter-gatherers and near eastern people. So, genetically too, Yamna people were blend of three distinct ancestries. It has not been suggested exactly when and how this blend occurred. If PIE has to be linked with the genetics, the PIE too was blend of three different languages!

We have seen in the last chapter that the invention of the agriculture dates back to 10000 BC, which possibly could have much earlier beginning. Till Bronze Age (2000BC)Yamna people were pastoralists. Exactly when and why they moved to spread elsewhere is not known. Europe was already populated by 7000 BC by hunters and food gatherers. There is no evidence that these people were wiped out by any invading community. There is no evidence to prove that Yamna people had overwhelming population to effect demographic dominance. By the time Yamna culture came into the existence, Egyptian, Sumerian and Indus culture had reached to its pinnacle. They had sophisticated languages and writing system. They had built massive cities and monuments. They had irrigation system and advanced farming in place long before Yamna people (or any hypothetical PIE group) might have migrated elsewhere.

Agriculture effected the cultural and linguistic explosion. New vocabulary, well structured grammar and essential mathematics were natural outcome to meet the urgent demands of the new lifestyle that people had to adopt. It changed religious ideas as well. The emergence of the fertility cult can be attributed to the invention and practice of the farming for livelihood.  It can be easily shown that the languages of the settled agriculturist societies are always advanced over the languages of the pastoralists. The linguistic developments are always related to the growing complexities of the societies.

Genetics does not help us to understand the origin of the languages and its spread. The history of the languages is far older than the so-called migration era of the PIE speakers. Genetic mixtures too have long history than it is assumed. The nomadic era of hunter-food gatherer man ranges from at the least 60000 years ago. During this vast span of time, interbreeding between numerous tribes can result in admixture of various genetic pools, making it impossible to find a single source.

Development of ability to speak in human species has ancient origin. Though it is difficult to determine exactly when human started giving meaning to certain series of sounds and structured them grammatically, it is certain that the rudimentary languages had developed in every tribe or culture long before the so-called Yamna people set out on an assumed mission to subjugate other cultures and impose their language! Even in the known history we hardly find any example where even mighty rulers could impose their languages on the subjugated people, unless they outnumbered them. The cultural and technological exchanges too have an ancient history. Hence the migration theory to prove spread of the IE languages is too weak and unreliable.

Most importantly, migration theories do not help us in solving the very problem of its origin. We have to go into the root to find why languages differ from region to region. We have to see how the distinct languages forms exhibiting distinct characteristics to which we call different language group.

However, we must note from the genomics reports that the genes carry the regional markers without which it would be impossible to determine the geographical source of ancestral genes. The genomics report concludes that the Yamna people were admixture of East European or Caucasus hunter-gatherers and near eastern people. So, genetically too, Yamna people were blend of three distinct ancestries. Without regional markers it would be impossible to determine location of the source genes.

Hence, we may conclude that human genes bear regional markers. Spread of the languages cannot be attributed solely to the migrations. Archeology does not tell us anything about the language spoken by the people of any material culture. Spread of one material culture does not indicate spread of the same linguistic entity. To solve question of language groups we need to first understand origin of the languages and why there are similarities and dissimilarities in different languages and whether it is sane to classify the languages in some group and attribute its origin to some proto source language.

We have to find answers to the most baffling question, why regional languages do differ and why entirely different set of languages do emerge even in closely adjoining geographies. Unless we understand this, the problem of group languages will not satisfactorily be solved. In my opinion regional geological formations do influence the language groups and subgroups. In next chapter I will try to prove this from connection between Indian languages and the geological formations of the regions where they are spoken. Geology also might have effect of genetic structures of the people which has to be studied further. However, migration is not answer to the group of the languages problem.

*

6

Language groups: Geological connections!

          Specific geological structure that includes rock formations, geo-magnetism, local gravitation, topography, climate, flora and fauna and general distribution of the minerals in surface soil forms the regions of the distinct characteristics, no matter even if they are geographically closely connected. The geological regions of the similar physical characteristics do reflect in the particular cultural and linguistic traits of the people living within the boundaries of the region. In fact, the general psychology and genetics of the people is influenced and governed by the particular geological formation of the region.

            In this chapter, I desire to show the clear relationship between regional geologies and languages spoken in general. The problem of language distributions is not satisfactorily solved as yet. PIE speakers’ migration theories are widely in circulation to explain the spread of the IE languages from as yet uncertain location.¹ Genetics too has been used recently to show the spread of the languages through population movements and surprisingly is used to explain caste dynamics in India.²

            Without entering into that endless debate, I wish to propose an alternative theory, which, in my opinion, explains the regional languages and reasons of their similarities and dissimilarities with others giving rise to the suspicion whether in reality such net of certain language has effected because of the population movements or not!

            I shall show that the population movement is not required for the emergence of certain language, labeled as the grouping of certain languages, such as IE or Dravidian or any other language group for that matter. The hypothesis strongly relies on the following-

            a) The language is an outcome of innate psychological abilities of the people. The group of certain people constantly living for generations in certain geographical limits does develop the peculiar psychological tendencies those reflect in their culture and language.

            b) Boundaries of every language (dialect) are decided by the boundaries of specific geological formations and as the geological features start changing on the borders of distinct geological region, the gradual change in the language and culture do occur.

            c) Genetics and language may have the certain relationship; though as yet it is undetermined whether language is an inborn quality.³ It is possible that in course of the evolution, faculty of language emerged most accidently in human being. Regional human genetics do vary. However, genetics just proves ability to learn, develop and speak complex languages. It may not be a factor that determines the origination of the language.

            d) The identifiable regional markers carried by the genes are well recorded and at present without understanding their significance have been widely used to promote migration theories.⁴

            e) There is an influence of geomagnetism on human psychologies.⁵ The local geomagnetism, which varies with region to region owing to the specific geological formations, some way influences the general psychology of the people.

            f) General mineral distribution in particular geographies is distinct that influences the local crops and water and thus the people those over generations are consuming them. The mineral distribution in body (and brain) through nutrition does develop the certain biological characteristics influencing the psychology that reflects in their general behavior and language. 

General observations

            a) There is a certain relationship between the geological formation patterns of the regions and how the language will be developed within its boundary. With the change in geological formations, from one region to other, we distinctly can note the change in cultural expression and dialect.  If there are fault regions we can notice entirely different languages, unrelated to the surrounding regions, are spoken.

            b) Pronunciation patterns due to slight geological variations do change region by region, no matter even if they speak the same language.

            c) Though Dravidian language speakers are geographically annexed to the landmass of Indo-Aryan speakers, we find clear distinction between the both, because both the regions have entirely different qualities of the geological formations.

            d) Every Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages again are distinctly sub-classified in the respective regions, though they have two distinct sources. Within the regions too we find distinct dialects and even independent to the surrounding language groups! We find regional geologies, too, differ wherever we see such linguistic differences/variations.

            e. It is assumed that language variations begun because in ancient times different tribes began to form and to claim their territory, in order to differentiate themselves many of these groups made changes to their language which helped evolution of the languages.⁶ However, identity or isolation does not satisfactorily answer the basic question as to why with changing regions variation in language occur.

These are the general observations we should keep in mind. In this paper, I will focus on Indian languages those have been divided by linguists as Indo-Aryan and Dravidian. Genetically these groups have been classified as Ancestral North Indians (ANI) and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) to denote different genetic identities. It has been assumed that both the ancestral populations belonging to different original geographies are responsible for the formation of the ethno-linguistic groups in India. ⁷

                It should be noted that the geographical identities of the ANI’s have been established based on the genetic evidence, thus making it clear that the geographical genetic markers do exist and they are because of the reasons outlined above.

            A fact should be noted that despite the geographical closeness and interaction of millenniums Dravidian languages could not be replaced by otherwise so-called-victorious IE languages though there is and was political and cultural unity to some extent. This is a phenomenon that needs the serious explanation which cannot be solved based on the predetermined and popular migration theories.

            We will have a brief look at the geology of the South and North India to establish geological connection to the distinct cultures and languages, including genetics.

Dravidian Language regions

            Dravidian languages are spread in south in the four major states, such as Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Tamilnadu. Interestingly these regions stand apart from rest of the north India from geological point of view as well.

            Let us see how. Geological survey of India has done the extensive survey of these states as well. Let us have a look at their findings/observations.

            1. Southern Granulite terrain (SGT) covers Andhra, Tamilnadu and southern part of Karnataka.

            2. Vast expanse of granulite gneiss terrain covers central and north-east Tamilnadu, referred as “Sathyamangalam” in Tamilnadu is considered to be geological and geographical continuity with ‘Sargurs” of Karnataka.

            3. Various types of pink and grey gneisses forming part of the Peninsular Gneissic Complex extend southward from the states of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh and occur north of Palar River along the northern border of Tamil Nadu. Around Krishnagiri, these gneisses form different textural types of various hues and colours.

            4. The southern extension of the Kolar Schist Belt of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh is seen around Veppanapalli, Maharajagadai and Bargur areas of Dharmapuri District. Within Tamil Nadu the schist belt breaks up into three arms and later extends as dismembered lenses and linear patches within the Peninsular Gneiss. The schist belt is made up of assemblages of greenstone rocks designated as Kolar Group comprising biotite, hornblende schists and amphibolites of different types, banded ferruginous quartzite and acid volcanics (Champion Gneiss) represented by quartz - sericite schist and quartzo feldspathic gneiss.

            5. The Pre-Cambrian terrain of Tamil Nadu is extensively fractured and deeply faulted particularly in the northern and central parts. Not all the faults, shear zones and fracture zones have been depicted.

            6. There are various groups those vary in age and formations, but are exclusively found in southern states.

            7. Karnataka, forming a part of the Indian Shield, is constituted of rock formations ranging in age from 3300 m.y. to 5 m.y. Barring a narrow coastal strip of about 5000 sq.km of Tertiary and Quaternary sediments and another 31,250 sq.km of Deccan basalts, the remaining area is dominated by Archaean-Proterozoic rocks. Mysore Plateau,  geologically constituted of Dharwar Craton comprises of greenstone-granite belts, gneisses and granulites.

            8. Of Karnataka, components of Peninsular Gneiss always show isoclinal folds with thinned limbs and stretched hinges defined by compositional banding. Viscosity contrast between the quartzo-feldspathic layers and amphibolite mass under the compressive forces have caused a variety of structures. Ptygmatic folds in quartzo-feldspathic materials, agmatitic structures are the few common forms.

            9. Greenstone belts of Karnataka have complex geological history and rich mineral resources. The era of 2900 million years to 2600 million years witnessed this great event of the evolution of Greenstone belts in Karnataka. Stratigraphic level vis-à-vis geochronological positioning of different schist belts had always been a point of endless yet useful debate.

            10. Of Kerala, geologically, is occupied by Precambrian crystallines, acid to ultra basic intrusives of Archaean to Proterozoic age, Tertiary (Mio-Pliocene) sedimentary rocks and Quaternary sediments of fluvial and marine origin. Both the crystallines and the Tertiary sediments have been extensively lateritised.

            11. The rocks of Peninsular Gneissic Complex(PGC) are exposed in the northern parts of Kerala adjoining Karnataka . This consists of a heterogeneous mixture of granitoid materials. The equivalent rocks of PGC in Kerala include hornblendebiotite gneiss (sheared), biotite-hornblende gneiss, foliated granite and pink granite gneiss. Granite gneiss is exposed along the intra-State boundary of Palakkad District as well as in Idukki District.

            12. This consists of gneisses showing preponderance of either hornblende or biotite. The percentage of hornblende and biotite varies from place to place. This can be traced from Manantoddy to further northwest upto the west coast. West of Manantoddy, the rock is hornblende gneiss. It shows coarse granulitic to gneissic texture and is composed of hornblende, feldspar, quartz, pyroxene, biotite and garnet. Alkali feldspar shows alteration to clay and sericite. Biotite is mainly secondary after hornblende.

            Observations:

            All the four states, speaking the languages belonging to the Dravidian group, have regional independent features with changed geological patterns and mixtures but having the same geological source. We find that with the slight change in local geology has created separate local dialects. For example, Travancore region has different dialect whereas Palakkad and Trichur region and northern Kerala have different dialects.

            Tulu Nadu, a small region that spreads between south-west part of Karnataka and Kasaragod district of Kerala, where proto-South Dravidian Tulu language is spoken. Interestingly, the region has peculiar geological formations that have occurred 88 million years ago and they fall apart from the rest of the adjoining geological features. The local changes could have been occurred because of effects of the tectonic movements, seismic force and ancient volcanic eruption that has caused the present formation with different mix.

            So, though there are regional variations in the geological compositions and geography, the overall general geological formation of the southern India is quite distinct from northern India.

            Genetically, Dravidians are classified under L Haplogroup whereas North Indians have been classified in R1a Haplogroup. The demarcation has to be connected to geological differences and not migrations. The general geology of north India is as below-

Indo-European Language speaking regions

Maharashtra

            Maharashtra is a state geographically connected to the Dravidian language speaking regions towards south and east and towards North and north-east are the regions annexed with Indo-European speaking regions. That way Maharashtra can be said as a land that forms middle point clearly separating two distinct language groups.

            The entire area of the State forms a part of the “Peninsular Shield”, which is composed of rocks commencing from the most ancient rocks of diverse origin, which have undergone considerable metamorphism. Over these ancient rocks of Precambrian era lie a few basins of Proterozoic era and of permocarboniferous periods which are covered by extensive sheets of horizontally bedded lava flows comprising the Deccan trap.   More than 80% area of the State is covered by the Deccan trap, which have concealed geologically older formations.  The most important economic minerals such as coal, iron ore, manganese ore, limestone, etc. are found in the geologically older formations.

            Structurally, the entire area of the state forms a part of the “Peninsular Shield” of India which represents a fairly stable block of earth crust that has remained unaffected by, mountain-building movements, since the advent of the Palaeozoic era.   Some of the subsequent movements in the crust have been of the nature of normal and block faulting which have laid down certain portions bounded by tensional cracks of faults giving rise to basins in which sedimentary beds of the Gondwana age have been deposited.  

            Particularly in the Vidarbha region giving rise to the the important limestone as Penganga beds and coalfields of the Pench-Kanhan valley, the Umred – Bander field the Wardha valley and Vidarbha valley. 

             It is generally accepted that the Western coast has been formed as a result of the faulting.   Along this coast from Ratnagiri to Mumbai, and further north in Thane district there exists a series of hot springs arranged almost in linear fashion which suggests that they are situated on a line of fracture.  

            Further evidence regarding the formation of west coast by faulting is offered by the Western Ghats comprising Deccan trap lava flows, which are several hundred metres thick near the coast and which gradually thins out east wards.   Near Panvel, near the west coast the Deccan traps show westerly slopes indicating designated as Panvel flexure. Maharashtra has mostly basaltic soil.

            The language Marathi is spoken in most of the Maharashtra State, possessing unique characteristics. We also find dialect variation in every geological sub-zones, though they comprise of mostly similar basic structure. In Eastern Vidarbha,  we find totally different dialects for those regions has different geological formations and are not part of the Deccan Trap. Also the variations and formations of Konkan strip suggest the probable reasons of the difference in local dialects those posses some alien elements to Marathi. 

Madhya Pradesh

            The oldest group of rocks comprising of Archaeans and Proterozoic formation constitute nearly 45% area of the State. The next younger formation of Carboniferous to lower Cretaceous comprising Gondwana Super Group covers 10% area while the formation of Cretaceous to Paleocene comprising mostly of Deccan Trap basalt constitutes 38% area of the State.

            The state of Chhattisgarh, geographically encompasses an area over 1,35,195 sq km. Geologically, it constitutes important rock formations stratigraphically ranging from Archaean to Recent. Northern Crustal Province (NCP) and the Southern Crustal Province (SCP) separated by East-West trending Central Indian Shear Zone (CIS) are major tectonic features with crucial geological manifestations.

            The regional tectonics have played major role in the tectonic evolution of the Chhattisgarh rocks. The oldest rock in the NCP belongs to the Archaean which includes the granite gneisses and enclaves of igneous and sedimentary rocks confined to southern part of the Province in the Bilaspur-Raigarh belt. Gneisses and granitoids exposed to the east of Mahanadi basin are classified as Chhotanagpur Gneissic Complex. The NCP is devoid of any volcano-sedimentary sequence and Proterozoic cover rocks, unlike the SCP. The younger sequences of Upper Carboniferous to Lower Cretaceous Gondwana rocks are well developed in the Mahanadi and South Rewa basins. The two basins merge in Surguja area north of Baikuntapar. Lameta Group is exposed in the Amarkantak plateau region.

            Remnants of Deccan Trap occur in the plateaus in the western and northeastern parts of Bilaspur District and southeastern and eastern part of Surguja District. Laterite and bauxite pockets occur at Jamirapat and Manipatin, Surguja District and Phutka Pahar, Korba District. Quaternary alluvium is confined to major river valleys. The SCP is an Archaean to Neoproterozoic assembly of lithotectonic association comprising Archaean to Palaeoproterozoic Bengpal, Sukma, Bailadila, Sonakhan Groups, gneiss-granitoids and younger Meso to Neoproterozoic cover rocks of Chhattisgarh, Indravati, and Pakhal Groups. Together they constitute the Bastar Craton.

            Palaeoproterozoic volcanic rocks of Nandgaon Group extend in a NS direction in to the western part of bordering Maharashtra. The Dongargarh and its equivalent granites in Madanbera and Kanker-Mainpur areas occupy major portion of South Central part of the state. Volcano sedimentary sequence of Khairagarh and Abujhmar Groups and sediments of Chilpi Group belonging to PalaeoMesoproterozoic unconformably overlie the older sequences and the granites in the Maikala Range and Abujhmar plateau region. The Mesoproterozoic Pakhal Supergroup occupies the Godavari valley region in the southwestern part bordering Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra. The Meso-Neoproterozoic Chhattisgarh Group of rocks occupies the plains of Chhattisgarh region. The cover sediments of Indravati-Sabari-and Pairi Groups are equivalent of Indravati Group and occupy the Jagdalpur plateau. Interestingly we find blend of tribal and Odia culture. Rocks of kimberlite affinity intrude in to the Indravati and Khariar sediments and in the gneisses some of which are diamondiferous. Laterite and bauxite forms cappings at number of places over these rocks in Keskal-Amabera area.

Gujarath

            Gujarat exposes rocks from Precambrian era to Holocene period. It has three different geographic regions, namely eastern Gujrat , Kutch and Saurashtra/Kathiawar. The eastern Gujarat shows a general southwesterly and west-ward slope from the dissected and denuded hilly terrain of Preacambrians to the alluvial plain, which gradually merges into the sea and gulf. Shield area of Gujarat lies in the eastern part and is occupied by the Archaean -Prechampaner Gneissic Complex and Prelunavada Gneissic Complex (equivalent to BGC of Rajasthan); Palaeo-to MesoProterozoic Aravalli and Delhi supergroups and Neoproterozoic Godhra-, Erinpura- and IdarGranites. The Mesozoic rocks are exposed in Kutch region and in northern part of Saurashtra Plateau. It is represented by the Pachchham, the Chari, the Katrol and the Bhuj formations in Kutch region and by the Dhrangadhra Group, the Wadhwan Group in Saurashtra Plateau and the Lameta Formation and the Bagh Beds in Kheda, Panchmahals and Vadodara districts (Eastern Gujarat). The Saurashtra Plateau in the west is separated from the eastern Gujarats undulating terrain by alluvial plain. The basalt dominated 'Deccan Trap' with restricted acid and intermediate volcanics and intrusive is exposed as thick pile in the southern part of Gujarat, Saurashtra and as relatively less thick horizons in Kutch Region.

            It represents broadly the geological time span from 80 Ma to 60 Ma. Tertiary rocks (laterite, clay and carbonaceous shale, lignite etc.) which overlap these volcanics, are present mainly in the southern part of Kutch region, western and southern part of Saurashtra Plateau and also in the area bounded by Narmada and Tapi rivers in the plains of South Gujarat. Pleistocene age of Gujarat is represented by foraminifera bearing aeolian as well as marine limestone. About 50% area of Gujarat is covered by unconsolidated Holocene sediments, majority of which is older and younger flood plain deposits of Narmada, Tapi, Mahi, Sabarmati and Banas rivers. The coastal belt surrounding the Gulf of Kachchh and Gulf of Kutch is dominated by younger and older tidal flat deposits. The state of Gujarat is well known for dinosaurian remains represented by skeletal remains and nests recorded from Kheda district. The state of Gujarat is endowed with a number of mineral deposits viz., bauxite, bentonite, base metals, fireclay, fluorite, fuller's earth, limestone, chalk, glass sand, manganese, graphite, lignite, petroleum and natural gas, building and dimension stones.

Remarks:

            Though the above description is not in minute detail, has been borrowed from Geological Survey of India, it suggests the following-

1)      We can see clearly that the geological formation of Dravidian speaking regions stands apart from the geology of the north India. We find Dravidian languages prominently being spoken in the regions those geologically strongly differ from rest of the subcontinent. Though the landmass is connected with the Northern India, its peculiar formation, age, overall mineral composition and deposits separate it by tectonic/structural boundaries.

                  2)    The flora and fauna, too, is rather quite different in both the parts of the country. The peculiar food habits have been developed since ages owing to its climate and environment, possessing inherently the mineral qualities of the soil, of the southern part of India and elsewhere have impacted the genetic structures that is now being identified as having different origins.

                  3)    Geology of North India, though varies region to region, has unique base formation, quite different than of southern regions. The thrust region created by the collision that caused rising of the Himalayas, underneath has maintained the ancient formations in changed positions and causing the different mix of the surface mineral distribution. This may have resulted in rise of different dialects though falling under same linguistic group.

                  However, we can see other peculiarities about the regions wherever tribal population and distinct languages do exist. The regions having some or other excessive mineral deposit have impacted the cultural and linguistic patterns of the local habitants. 

                  4)    We can notice that on the boundary zones, where two typical geologies meet, we find the lingo-cultural changes. For example, as we cross Kolhapur region of Maharashtra to enter in Karnataka, we find the surface rock structures gradually changing with the language, pronouncing patterns of the people till the shadow zone finally merges with the southern landmass.  

                  5)    It can be said that the major distinction in the geology of both the regions have caused emergence of different linguistic groups. The same applies to the North-Eastern and North-Western regions where we come across the different geological formations, and hence different dialects. The larger is geological variation with adjoining regions; larger is the gap between linguistic similarities.  No any other explanation, such as movement of the people, can satisfactorily answer the formation of the linguistic groups.

                  6)    There is close relationship between the language spoken and the general psychology of the people living in the certain regions having unique geological conditions for generations.

                  7)    Exchanges or borrowings do influence the course of the specific languages, but that too are adopted in a manner that is suitable to their psychology.    The borrowed vocabulary or terms do not remain the same in its original form when adopted but are blended in the peculiar local patterns, sometimes so much so that the original form has to be traced with efforts.

                  Looking at the above, we can surmise that the local geographies and geological patterns are the most influential factors on the general psychology of the people living for generations in certain regions that causes emergence of the certain languages or dialects. The relationship between the languages is not as much biological as is geological. The land determines the course of the language and the culture as both depends on the general psychology of the people.

            The proponents of migration theories to solve riddle of the languages should seriously look in to the geological connection, so that the problem of the genetic groups also can be solved to give full stop to the racial theories. 

            Trying to derive the caste or racial dynamics in genomic data could be a wrong and misguiding approach. Using the same genetic data attempting to prove the Aryans were indigenous is another falsity studded with supremacist approach. The migrations is a historical fact and will remain a trend in future as well, but connecting spread of the language solely to it is incorrect as geology plays major role in the evolution of the languages, culture and physical structures of the people. The M17 distribution or R1a is not a product of the migrations but it is natural development caused by the geological features of the lands people live in.

*

           

Ref.:  1. “The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Evidence and Inference in Indian History”, edited by Edwin Francis Bryant, Laurie L. Patton

 2. “How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate” by Tony Joseph, The Hindu, 16^th June, 2017

3. Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behaviour  By Richard Gross, pub- Hachette, UK.

4. “Massive migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe” by Wolfgang Haak, Iosif Lazaridis, David Reich et al, Published in Nature, 11^th June, 15

5. “Effects of geomagnetic activity variations on the physiological and psychological state of functionally healthy humans: Some results of Azerbaijani studies” by Elchin S.Babayev, Aysel A. Allahverdiyeva et al, published in Science Direct, Volume 40, Issue 12, 2007

6.” Tools from evolutionary biology shed new light on the diversification of langhuages” by SC Levinson, RD Gray . Online can be accessed at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22336727

7. Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India, Priya Moorjani, online can be accessed at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3769933/