What is the oldest learnable language?
>>535087
I don't want to work
I want to bang on the drum all day
>>535087
Well, in that sense it would be the oldest to be sufficiently preserved through writing. I hardly see the point of learning a language just because it is old
Sumerian
>>535100
Ever since I was a tiny boy
I don't want no candy
I don't need no toy
>>535140
Probably this.
There are older writing systems, but probably none as complete or well understood.
Proto-Niger-Congo or proto-Afroasiatic, these probably date back to Mesolithic.
>>536209
You can't learn those
>>536260
Yes you can, it's possible reconstruct many terms.
For example I can say "two" in proto-Afro-Asiatic: "tsan".
>>535087
Sumerian.
>>536260
sure you can:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2a9o8GHcsck
>>536685
That's different from being able to speak it
>>535182
>There are older writing systems
like what?
>>536738
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rongorongo
>>536754
Really cool and all, but even Wikipedia claims it wasn't invented earlier than the 13th century.
>>536754
rongorongo probably isn't even 400 years old. There's no evidence for it in other polynesian cultures, so it almost certainly doesn't predate the colonisation of Easter Island circa 1200, and there's no direct evidence for it until the 1860s. The best theory presented so far is that the concept of writing was introduced by European sailors sometime in the 18th century, and via a sort of cargo-cultism the natives took this idea and developed their own glyphs. Rongorongo probably isn't even real writing, but a sort of proto-writing.
>>535087
Anyone got a tree for Sino-Tibetan languages?
Sumerian
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUcTsFe1PVs
>>537669
Isn't the pronunciation mostly made up?
Probably Avestan or Sanskrit.
>>536209
>implying niger-congo and afroasiatic are real language families
fuck off greenberg
>>537724
Probably, we have no idea how their real accent sounded
>>537832
Serious question, how do you consider a real language family ?
What's that just the /pol/ in you or is there a real thinking that these African languages are not legit ?
>>537669
all that shit is probably blown up by isis now
>>537724
Yeah but it probably sounded similar to iranian.
>>535087
I had someone explain that Latvian or Lithuanian are about as close to Sanskrit to the origibal Indo-European language.
But I've never seen that written anywhere.
>>537887
I think that's just a 3D reconstruction
>>537848
Based on my experience researching some of these languages I think it's very obvious that those languages are not genetically related. It's no better than altaic.
>>537901
No, that's an overstatement to show how conservative they are despite their late attestation. Sanskrit despite conserving many original features due to its early attestation is also very innovative, much like Greek.
>>537848
There's very little shared vocabulary that you can even posit. They're certainly not on the same footing as Indo-European or something like that.
>>535087
Hebrew
>>537900
Fuck off Abdul
Basque may not be very old as it is right now, but it's the last pre-indo-european language in western europe.
>>535087
Hindi
>>536209
MUP DA DOO DIDDA PO MO GUB BIDDA BE DAT TUM MUHFUGEN BIX NOOD COF BIN DUB HO MUHFUGGAMUP DA DOO DIDDA PO MO GUB BIDDA BE DAT TUM MUHFUGEN BIX NOOD COF BIN DUB HO MUHFUGGAMUP DA DOO DIDDA PO MO GUB BIDDA BE DAT TUM MUHFUGEN BIX NOOD COF BIN DUB HO MUHFUGGAMUP DA DOO DIDDA PO MO GUB BIDDA BE DAT TUM MUHFUGEN BIX NOOD COF BIN DUB HO MUHFUGGA
>>537848
It's not that the languages aren't "legit", they obviously exist and are languages, but the grouping into language families is pretty sketchy; the relationships between the languages and their development is really unclear, there's little shared vocab, etc.
>>536908
There's none, Sino-Tibetan languages are too much of a fucking mess. A lot of branches which you need to consider aren't even Sino-Tibetan at all, languages of Arunachal Pradesh for example, despite being classified as ST, seem to be a bunch of isolates which happen to have a few Sino-Tibetan loanwords.
Language of some uncontacted Amazonian or Indian tribe, maybe.
>>538620
This sounded funnier in your head, didn't it?
What's up with mozarabic being listed as pyrenean when that was the region where the muslims controlled the least amount of time?
>>535087
For IE languages it would be Sanskrit and Greek. Homeric Greek, specifically, since a lot of Mycenaean is just reconstructed. Homeric Greek is ridiculously archaic, to the point where Classical and Hellenistic scholars didn't know what some of the words even meant. Maybe Avestan?
Proto proto indo European
Oscan can be learned. There's a good book on it from 1903 scanned. Its fun if you know latin since its basically a bizzaro version of it.
>>539648
Neat. I've always wanted to learn more about pre-roman domination Italic languages.
>>538825
#REKT
>>538620
underrated post
>>537887
Thank God, now Kurds can make up their own history of owning that land.
>>537832
greenberg went crazy in his later career and tried to say there was such a thing as proto-amerind for the american indian languages, and an even larger family incorporating just about every known language family, dubious or otherwise. afroasiatic is as real as PIE.
his classification of african languages is what earned him his fame in historical linguistics though, and that classification is still pretty influential. afroasiatic is solid almost to the level of indoeuropean.
>>539605
>>535140
I thought it would be proto-indo-european when I first saw this thread, and proto-indo-european it probably is, unless you count proto-afroasiatic as learnable, but you actually could make a case for sumerian being plausibly older than PIE. after all, sumerian is attested from at least 3000bc, and conservative estimates of PIE place it being spoken as recently as 3000bc as well.
>>536754
>>535087
Oldest dead language:
Sumerian
Oldest living language:
Hebrew
>>544747
>Oldest living language
>Hebrew
m8
You know Hebrew was dead until the 1800's, right? It was revived by the Zionist movement.
>>538765
Once they do contact it's an irreversible change.
You know that language that has very little numbers in it and shit like that? After contact they just do their counting in Portuguese and many are learning Portuguese as well so the study of the language is a race against time.
>>538618
Urdu
>>538303
Kek.
bosnian xD
You can learn ancient Akkadian. I have a book on it in my house. You'll be reading Cuneiform of Babylon. Certainly the oldest learnable language of all time.
>>535087
>Yola
How would one go about learning Yola? I googled it and there was a song in the language and it sounded very nice, however that's all I could find :(
>>546124
Not super similar if wikipedia is to be believed.
>>535087
Cave paintings.
>>536738
I was thinking Eriduan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-writing
It isn't as clear as you'd think where symbols end and writing begins.
>>546124
Barely related at all, its been dead for 4000 years.
>>538918
Bullshit. There were Sumerian-Akkadian bilingual texts found in XIX. century, since then there have been Sumerian grammar books and vocabularies.
>>544747
Greek and Sanskrit are attested earlier than Hebrew.
>>548959
More like 1500 years. Try to be more accurate
>>547459
Sumerian, the language the akkadians got cuneiform from, is still older.
>>540159
Go back to /pol/ and stay gone
>>538765
I wonder if there still are any uncontacted tribes.
>>535087
Akkadian no doubt. Sumerian allegedly as others suggested in the thread, but as you know, it's an isolated language with less records.
>>551346
it's quite obvious that he was being ironic, pantywaist
it doesn't really make sense to ask about an oldest language, learnable or otherwise
>>551399
>>551387
>>544747
>Oldest living language:
Tamil
>>544747
>Oldest
>living language
Technically all languages. If you want to the oldest dead language, probably Sumerian or Hittite
