[bravenous]

Sanskrit is one language not many different. It is like saying Bavarian German aka High German is different language from Hamburg German - they are both German. So there is and will be difference between regular speakers with good grammar vs occasional speakers with poor grammar. I run in these issues when I speak basic Sanskrit with Gurukul based students.

The source of Sanskrit and Sanskrit influence is the Saraswat Valley civilisation around 6000 BC. Some recent books have done radio carbon, Sanskrit literature, astronomical charts, climatic events and genomics to validate the time line. The central Asian language influence is migration out of India to Central Europe & Volga referred to as Uttar Kuru.

[kranner]

Please list these books and sources. An 8000 year old timeline is quite a leap over the current consensus which is 3500 years (the Rigveda, whose earliest inscriptions are found way outside the subcontinent all the way over in Syria).

Also what is the Saraswat Valley Civilisation? Are you referring to the Indus Valley Civilisation?

I’m sorry but the Out of India hypothesis is not accepted in the scientific and linguistic consensus in any way. The migration is believed to be in the other direction.

Also, Panini himself distinguished between different forms of Sanskrit as I understand.

[jimsimmons]

Bavarian and other Germans are actually different. 20th century nationalism in Europe merged them into one blob. Same with Italian. In fact many dialects of italian aren’t even mutually intelligible.

Lol at your out of India theory which literally has no basis in any of what you describe

[gumby]

> Bavarian German aka High German

Bavarian German (Bayerische) is quite different from High German (Hochdeutsche) and people from Bavaria would not appreciate this mix up.