3

I have noticed that there seem to be many words that have travelled the globe due to trade, such as the word orange or rice, which have plausible origins in proto-Dravidian. Meanwhile, it is hypothesized that the language (if it is a language, which some people argue against) recorded in the Indus script is a Dravidian one. All this makes me wonder if these numerous possibly-Dravidian Wanderworts are indicative of the Indus Valley Civilization's success in trade.

This page of Wikipedia lists 7 English words with possible Dravidian origins, notably:

  • Orange, through Old French orenge, Medieval Latin orenge and Italian arancia from Arabic نارنج naranj, via Persian نارنگ narang and Sanskrit नारङ्ग naranga-s meaning "an orange tree", derived from proto-Dravidian.
  • Rice, via Old French ris and Italian riso from Latin oriza, which is from Greek ὄρυζα oryza, through an Indo-Iranian tongue finally from Sanskrit व्रीहिस् vrihi-s "rice", derived from proto-Dravidian.
  • Sugar, through Old French sucre, Italian zucchero, Medieval Latin succarum, Arabic: سكر sukkar and Persian: شکر shakar ultimately from Sanskrit शर्करा sharkara which means "ground or candied sugar" (originally "grit" or "gravel"), from proto-Dravidian.

So, is it likely that the Dravidian language that these words came from is the language of the Indus Valley Civilization? Is this a poor, uninformed idea? or, alternatively, am I late to the party and this is already intuitively obvious to historians? What are your thoughts?

7
  • 1
    I believe this is more suited to our sister site: english.stackexchange.com Dec 14, 2013 at 4:02
  • 1
    Really? I feel like this is much much more suited for a history kind of place and not at all an English one, especially because it's a question about these Wanderworts in general in languages all over the world, and why so many are theorized (by some) to have come from a Dravidian language, whereas nowadays we don't see Dravidian languages being that central to civilization; as opposed to being a simple etymology question about an English word.
    – mhenderson
    Dec 14, 2013 at 14:53
  • 1
    I waited to see your response before voting to Put on Hold. The linguistics experts hang out at ELU rather than here. There is always a historical element to any linguistics question, so relevant experts will understand the historical context, and in this case I believe the linguistics expertise is much more relevant than the historical. Dec 14, 2013 at 15:19
  • Fair enough--I'll try it out. Thanks for the tip.
    – mhenderson
    Dec 14, 2013 at 15:24
  • 1
    I have flagged a moderator to consider migrating it. will look an answer over at ELU. Dec 14, 2013 at 15:29

2 Answers 2

5

Sad to say, probably not. Let's look at the reported itenerary of these words:

Rice: via Old French ris and Italian riso from Latin oriza, which is from Greek ὄρυζα oryza, through an Indo-Iranian tongue finally from Sanskrit व्रीहिस् vrihi-s "rice", derived from proto-Dravidian.

So this word was first imported to Sanskrit (an Indo-Euorpean language descended likely from the language spoken by folks who destroyed the Indus Valley Civ), then to Greek, likely during the immediate time post-Alexander when those two languages would have been in contact. So no, unless you count having your territory overrun to be "trade", this wouldn't be one.

You see a similar pattern with your other two words:

Orange through Old French orenge, Medieval Latin orenge and Italian arancia from Arabic نارنج naranj, via Persian نارنگ narang and Sanskrit नारङ्ग naranga-s meaning "an orange tree", derived from proto-Dravidian.

Sugar through Old French sucre, Italian zucchero, Medieval Latin succarum, Arabic: سكر sukkar and Persian: شکر shakar ultimately from Sanskrit शर्करा sharkara which means "ground or candied sugar" (originally "grit" or "gravel"), from proto-Dravidian.

Both of these went into Sanskrit first, then into Persian, then to Arabic. The Sanskrit would indicate an Indo-European takeover of the words in the subcontinent. The Persian -> Arabic implies that the actual trade that moved these words west didn't happen until the Middle Ages. The Persians took over their namesake territory in the near east from the Greeks in the early middle ages. Arabic wasn't a particularly important (or well-traveled) language until about the 7th Century AD.

So it looks like in all cases the outside world only knows these terms thanks to the (Indo-European) Sanskrit speakers. Where trade outside the subcontinent is concerned, the trading parties appear to have been Greeks and Persians, trading with Sanskrit speakers.

2
0

Wikipedia gives etymology of the word, search each word separately. Mango originated from the Malayalam via Portuguese (also manga) during spice trade with Kerala in 1498. Rice Originated from Indo-Aryan (as in Sanskrit vrīhí-) and subsequently to Proto-Dravidian *wariñci according to Witzel and others. Orange Originated from the Sanskrit word for "orange tree" (नारङ्ग nāraṅga), which is probably of Proto-Dravidian origin. Anaconda The word anaconda is derived from the name of a snake from Sri Lanka. However, the name commonly used in Brazil is sucuri, sucuriju or sucuriuba. Reference: Wikipedia.

2
  • It is far fetched to attribute Proto-Dravidian origins to Indus Valley Civilisation based on word etymology.
    – MythBuster
    Jun 21, 2015 at 13:58
  • Copying something word for word is called quoting, not referencing.
    – Semaphore
    Jun 21, 2015 at 16:03

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