-4

enter image description here The chart shows what i guess about the succession using probable changes like e>ye or s>sh>ch or a>ya

PS: I'm not a linguist, just a curious language learner

  • 6
    Is this the extent of your research? What are you going on, the surface level similarities? How does "YES" relate to "I", "ICH", "JEG", or "EGO"? What arguments do you have against the Proto-Indo-European research? Sorry, but this really isn't a good place to experiment with novel etymologies. – curiousdannii Oct 3 '19 at 9:22
  • I told you i'm not a professional linguist and i'm just suggesting it as an interesting succession of similarities. Yes>es>esh>ish>ik>i can be a sequence of probable changes – QED Oct 3 '19 at 9:22
  • 2
    Well, sorry, but it doesn't look valid to me. Armenian is not closely related to other Indo-European branches, and the earliest records of the language date from only the 5th century CE. We have thousands more years of written evidence for other branches. – curiousdannii Oct 3 '19 at 9:28
  • 2
    People are responding negatively to your question because you seem to be confusing relationship with derivation. In your title you say "derived from", and in your chart you show Armenian as the central source. Sure, it's accepted and non-controversial that Armenian /es/ is related to the 1st person singular nominative those other languages. It's incorrect, though to say that Armenian /es/ is the source of the term, or that the other languages derive from Armenian. We know that is not the case for many reasons mentioned by other commenters. – Mark Beadles Oct 3 '19 at 14:55
  • well where is the chart from? – vectory Oct 3 '19 at 17:24
7

As the other answer somewhat obscurely tells you, all these words are related, but Armenian yes is not the common origin. There is also nothing particular in your question that justifies centering that chart around Armenian rather than any of the other languages. To learn more about how such relationships can reliably be established, you could read up on the comparative method.

  • Thanks for the answer, by this chart i mean that this word can relate apparently different words like ich and ya. I don't claim it's a common origin, but it's like a crossroad connecting cognates of different language families – QED Oct 3 '19 at 11:27
  • 2
    @QED what does that mean though, if it's a "crossroad" but not a common origin? You can explain the chart also by saying that English is original and Russian derived through Armenian from English, so I don't see in what way such a crossroad would be special. More importantly however, as you'll have read on the wikipedia page I linked, you need much more data for the comparative method to work. You're assuming sound changes, some of which are pretty common, but others (e.g. ish > ik) aren't. – Keelan Oct 3 '19 at 14:27
5

You're right that all of these are (probably) related! However, it's almost certain that Modern Armenian is not the common source. Armenian is a relatively modern language (it's not attested until the fourth century CE), while Indo-European written records go back to the sixteenth century BCE, two millennia earlier.

The original form is reconstructed as something like *éǵ, *eǵHóm, or *eǵóH. You see, for example, how some forms seem to go back to some sort of G-like sound, and others go back to some S-like sound? There's a consistent pattern that shows up over and over again, where some languages (the "satem" languages) show an S-like sound in certain words, and others (the "centum" languages) show a G-like sound. These words are written with a *ǵ in reconstructions. No modern language shows this *ǵ as a distinct sound, but we know that whatever common ancestor existed must have distinguished it from both *g and *s. This is solid evidence that no modern language is the common ancestor of the Indo-European family.

  • The fact that Armenian is "a relatively modern language" is not really relevant. More relevant is the fact that the [j-] on-glide in modern Armenian is a recent innovation. – fdb Oct 4 '19 at 12:07
4

Since this question is likely to disappear soon into the limbo of unspeakable queries I will restrict myself to a brief answer. The Armenian word for the 1st person singular pronoun is /es/, which in modern Armenian is pronounced [jes]. The [j] on-glide is not indicated in Armenian script. Armenian /es/ is cognate with the word for “I” in almost all other Indo-European languages, for which a proto-Indo-European source has been posited, namely *éǵ, possibly followed by a hypothetical laryngeal. Armenian /es/ is a regular descendant of this PIE *éǵ.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.