Editing Dravidian languages (section)

==Proposed relations with other families==
[[File:South Asian Language Families.jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.25|Language families in South Asia]]

Researchers have tried but have been unable to prove a connection between the Dravidian languages with other language families, including [[Indo-European languages|Indo-European]], [[Hurrian]], [[Basque language|Basque]], [[Sumerian language|Sumerian]], [[Korean language|Korean]], and [[Japanese language|Japanese]]. Comparisons have been made not just with the other language families of the Indian subcontinent ([[Indo-European languages|Indo-European]], [[Austroasiatic languages|Austroasiatic]], [[Sino-Tibetan languages|Sino-Tibetan]], and [[Nihali language|Nihali]]), but with all typologically similar language families of the Old World.{{sfnp|Krishnamurti|2003|pp=43–47}} Nonetheless, although there are no readily detectable genealogical connections, Dravidian shares several [[areal feature]]s with the [[Indo-Aryan languages]], which have been attributed to the influence of a Dravidian [[Substratum (linguistics)|substratum]] on Indo-Aryan.{{sfnp|Krishnamurti|2003|pp=38–42}}

Dravidian languages display typological similarities with the [[Uralic languages|Uralic]] language group, and there have been several attempts to establish a genetic relationship in the past.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Tyler | first1 = Stephen | year = 1968 | title = Dravidian and Uralian: the lexical evidence | journal = Language | volume = 44 | issue = 4| pages = 798–812 | doi=10.2307/411899| jstor = 411899 }}</ref> This idea has been popular amongst Dravidian linguists, including [[Robert Caldwell]],<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Webb | first1 = Edward | year = 1860 | title = Evidences of the Scythian Affinities of the Dravidian Languages, Condensed and Arranged from Rev. R. Caldwell's Comparative Dravidian Grammar | journal = Journal of the American Oriental Society | volume = 7 | pages = 271–298 | doi=10.2307/592159| jstor = 592159 }}</ref> [[Thomas Burrow]],<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Burrow | first1 = T | year = 1944 | title = Dravidian Studies IV: The Body in Dravidian and Uralian | journal = Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies | volume = 11 | issue = 2| pages = 328–356 | doi=10.1017/s0041977x00072517| s2cid = 246637174 }}</ref> [[Kamil Zvelebil]],<ref name="britannicaDVD">Zvelebil, Kamil (2006). Dravidian Languages. In ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' (DVD edition).</ref> and Mikhail Andronov.<ref>Andronov, Mikhail S. (1971), "Comparative Studies on the Nature of Dravidian-Uralian Parallels: A Peep into the Prehistory of Language Families". ''Proceedings of the Second International Conference of Tamil Studies'' Madras. 267–277.</ref> The hypothesis is, however, rejected by most specialists in Uralic languages,<ref>Zvelebil, Kamil (1970), ''Comparative Dravidian Phonology'' Mouton, The Hauge. at p. 22 contains a bibliography of articles supporting and opposing the theory</ref> and also in recent times by Dravidian linguists such as [[Bhadriraju Krishnamurti]].{{sfnp|Krishnamurti|2003|p=43}}

In the early 1970s, the linguist [[David W. McAlpin|David McAlpin]] produced a detailed proposal of a genetic relationship between Dravidian and the extinct [[Elamite language]] of ancient [[Elam]] (present-day southwestern [[Iran]]).{{sfnp|Zvelebil|1990|p=105}} The [[Elamo-Dravidian languages|Elamo-Dravidian]] hypothesis was supported in the late 1980s by the archaeologist [[Colin Renfrew]] and the geneticist [[Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza]], who suggested that [[Proto-Dravidian language|Proto-Dravidian]] was brought to India by farmers from the Iranian part of the [[Fertile Crescent]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Renfrew |first1=Colin |title=The Origins of Indo-European Languages |journal=Scientific American |date=October 1989 |volume=261 |issue=4 |pages=106–114 |doi=10.1038/scientificamerican1089-106 |bibcode=1989SciAm.261d.106R |jstor=24987446 }}</ref>{{sfnp|Cavalli-Sforza|2000|pp=157, 159}} (In his 2000 book, Cavalli-Sforza suggested western India, northern India and northern Iran as alternative starting points.{{sfnp|Cavalli-Sforza|2000|pp=157, 160}}) However, linguists have found McAlpin's cognates unconvincing and criticized his proposed phonological rules as ''ad hoc''.{{sfnp|Krishnamurti|2003|pp=44–45}}{{sfnp|Steever|2020|p=39}}{{sfnp|Campbell|Poser|2008|p=286}}{{sfnp|Kolichala|2016|p=76}} Elamite is generally believed by scholars to be a [[language isolate]], and the theory has had no effect on studies of the language.<ref>{{cite book | first = Matthew W. | last = Stolper | chapter = Elamite | editor-first = Roger D. | editor-last = Woodard | title = The Ancient Languages of Mesopotamia, Egypt and Aksum | publisher = Cambridge University Press | year = 2008 | pages = 47–82 | isbn = 978-0-521-68497-2 }} p. 48.</ref> In 2012, Southworth suggested a "Zagrosian family" of West Asian origin including [[Elamite]], Brahui and Dravidian as its three branches.{{sfnp|Southworth|2011|p=142}}

Dravidian is one of the primary language families in the [[Nostratic languages|Nostratic]] proposal, which would link most languages in [[North Africa]], [[Europe]] and [[Western Asia]] into a family with its origins in the [[Fertile Crescent]] sometime between the [[Last Glacial Period]] and the emergence of [[Proto-Indo-European language|Proto-Indo-European]] 4,000–6,000 BCE. However, the general consensus is that such deep connections are not, or not yet, demonstrable.{{sfnp|Krishnamurti|2003|pp=45–47}}