Which living Indo-European language(s) is closest to Proto-Indo-European?

Question

in other words, which language has retained the most archaic features?

Answer 1

Basque is NOT an Indo-European language, so no need to even mention it.

ALL contemporary Indo-European languages are equal in terms of their retention of archaic features since all languages are constantly changing. The Baltic languages Latvian and Lithuanian have certain archaic features of their grammar, but their sound system has been restructured. Sanskrit has certain archaic features of grammar, but it is not a contemporary language, it is about 4000 years old, as are Ancient Greek and Hittite, so these three languages could be said to retain archaic features, but only because they are closer to Proto-Indo-European. So ALL living Indo-European languages are equally close to Proto-Indo-European: about 8000 years.

And a note about the following answer: The notion that languages in or near the original homeland tend to be more conservative is false. Take Algonkian, for example. It is widely believed that Cree, Ojibwa, Fox, and Menomini are more conservative and are closer to Proto-Algonkian. However, there is a problem with that assumption. These four languages happen to be the languages that were originally used to reconstruct Proto-Algonkian, so, following an axiom of linguistic reconstruction--"The Proto-Language will always look the most like the language you know best"--Cree, Ojibwa, Fox, and Menomini look the most like Proto-Algonkian because Proto-Algonkian looks the most like them. Modern Algonkianists understand this principle very well and you will hear NO modern Algonkianist say that Cree, Ojibwa, Fox, and Menomini are more "archaic". In addition, there is a group of Algonkianists who do not accept the "Great Lakes homeland" theory of Algonkian origins and instead place the homeland of Proto-Algonkian out on the northern Plains. So when one looks at Proto-Indo-European as it is presently reconstructed it is easy to be deceived. The reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European grammar is only now beginning to reflect our understanding of Hittite and Anatolian grammar, which will have a major impact on revising what we think Proto-Indo-European grammar looks like. So we really can't say which languages are more archaic in this or that aspect of Proto-Indo-European grammar.

Answer 2

Latvian and Lithuanian are considered by many linguists to be the most conservative of the Indo-European languages and probably the nearest to what Proto-Indo-European was like.

After that, the Slavic languages, especially White Russian and Great Russian are probably the next closest living languages to Proto-Indo-European.

This is partly because all of the speakers of these languages live right in the general area where Proto-Indo-European is believed to have originated and been originally spoken. From here, some speakrs eventually moved West towards Italy, France, the British Isles and Scandinavia. Others moved South and South East to Greece, Armenia, Iran and India.

A similar scenario exists among the Algonquin and Iroquoian Indian languages of North America. The most conservative ones (Cree, Ojibwa, Fox, Shawnee, Mohawk, Wyandat etc) are spoken in the Great Lakes region because that appears to have been the original homeland of Proto-Algonquin and Proto-Irroquoian. The ones that are most adrift Cheyenne, Arapaho and Cherokee, happen to be spoken the farthest from the Great Lakes region.

Answer 3

http://www.bartleby.com/61/indoeuro.html

Look at this chart. It's easy to see what languages have changed the least that are still around. Check out how old Albanian is, or Armenian. Both of them have changed far less than Sanskrit, and some scholars aren't even sure if Basque IS an Indo-European language since it bears no phonetic or root-word similarity to any other IE languages.

Answer 4

Possibly Sanscrit, which has a written history going back over 4,000 years. Or maybe Basque, which is well off the scale when compared to other languaages.