Reconstruction talk:Proto-Indo-European/sengʷʰ-

Don't have any academic backing for this, but Sanskrit 'sangeeta' sounds like a descendant (you can kinda' tell with the e->a change which is a common change in Sanskrit from PIE) and it couldn't have just been reconstructed based on Germanic languages. I also checked the sangeeta (सङ्गीत) page for an etymology and there was none there. Maybe add a 'compare also with sangeeta' to the page? This is my first time writing here by the way, sorry if I messed anything up. --tita

From what i found its a combo of सं + गीत ,So different origin(but what if it was later folk etymology?) LolPacino 1:05, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, Prakrit saṃghai 'to say, teach'. From https://www.definitions.net/definition/sing, although I’m not sure how official that source is but I have seen it in official sources before (A dictionary from about 90 years ago.) Actually upon further research it seems that that term was derived from gā́yati (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/गायति#Sanskrit) meaning to sing with the prefix indicating “as one” (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/sem-.) The H may have been added intentionally or unintentionally. Also I think that it’s funny that the website that I linked references back to Wiktionary so someone else here must’ve realized the flawed etymology.

Another connection for this root may be Welsh deongl “to explain” though I know far more about Sanskrit than Welsh (I can’t even find the term through Google except through the translator but I certainly don’t know anything about the featural analysis of that word.)

Also the exact quality of the vowels in Indo European is unknown and it’s perhaps the case that what we represent with a short e was in fact pronounce æ and short o being like the upside down and backward a (-high, +low, +round.) This would mean that both of them were low vowels and that perhaps they rose in position as foreigners learned the languages in the new Indo-European homelands. I can I don’t have an official source for it because I can’t remember where I saw that. It was a non-logical inference that the author made and he is a linguist.