Is Hindi-Urdu Closer to Persian or Turkic?

[Ray_of_Hope]

Not to derail an very interesting lingustic thread - i speak 6 languages - my question is as follows:

On the C-band dish i have i receive a lot of asian channels from across entire Asian continent. When I have IRINN, I dont hear any single english word in Farsi, yet when I tuned to Indian channels, they have 70% english/30local language words mixed up to the point of annoyance not to mention the twisted accent. Similarly, i receive Dawn channel and a few others from Pakistan, the same trend. I see the same issue with Moroccan version of arabic with mixture of french.

Is there a problem with these volks that they cannot speak their own languages correctly that they have to mix in English? In our local Tswana, Sotho, Zulu, afrikaans etc, english words and substitution just does not occur. Is there an inferior complex. If you want to speak English, then bloody well speak English, if you speak Hindi or Urdu or Arabic or whatever, then just speak that language. This language pollution is pathetic.

Sorry to derail - I am trying to point out whether it is Urdu or Hindi, I see it completely now polluted with English to the point of complete corruption. If you want to speak a language, speak it in its entirity.

Firstly,this is not language pollution(.Talking specifically about urdu).Urdu is such a language which has evolved from its pure form into a vary beautiful language inheriting other beautiful words from different regional as well as foreign languaes like persian,pushto,arabic,turkic and in more recent times ENGLISH.So this is certainly not ``language pollution``.
I can give a few examples of common urdu words derived or rather taken words from english.e.gJug,glass,pipes,bulb,tubelights,switch,etc.These are just some of the random words which had been taken from english directly into urdu and these words along with hunderds of other words have been fully absorbed into urdu.
Hope you got my point.

 

[Levina]

The relationship is a little less direct than you might imagine, although what you have said is correct.

Go ahead explain it to me sir.
Your is student all agog.


*****************
sir i wanted to ask you something ...its related to my studies.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Thanks for that. I understand Urdu has more Perso-Arabic which is consuquent to Islam being a vehicle of cultural and linguistic infusion. But how much is the differance and is Urdu diverging more?

The general trend is - Urdu > Perso-Arabic and Hindi > Sanskrit.

I'm afraid that is not the basic issue. The grammar is. Not how many nouns are borrowed from which external language. If you want to understand what the fundamentals are, just look at the verbs.

@Shamain Indian's have a remarkable trait of actling like Chameleons. Around Turks they will stay showing off about how close their culture is. Around Persians they will show off around how close their culture is. Around Isreali/Jews they will starting distancing themselves from any Muslim heritage they have got and at home they will declare war against Muslims. Suddenly Muslim and anything Muslim is evil. Yet aspects of that culture will be used by them to show off like the example of Hindi which is direct result of Muslim rule that they so much resent.

Another example is they will kill meat eaters but then talk like they are the biggest meat eaters on earth. Suddenly vegetarianism and hinduism become divorced concepts.

If you want a serious discussion, you might like to try laying off the hate speech. On the other hand......

Indo European languages

Thank Heavens you posted. I was beginning to lose my grip on sanity.

 

[vsdoc]

@Joe Shearer

We labour .

No reason you should not put your shoulder into it from time to time.

Who knows, a seed may actually germinate .

 

[Joe Shearer]

Go ahead explain it to me sir.
Your is student all agog.

*****************
sir i had a doubt ...its related to my studies.

To be honest, looking at each and every post preceding this is quite meaningless. Let me summarise it for your sake; the others can honestly go hang.

First, Persian and Indo-Aryan (not Sanskrit) are from the same identical language, Indo-Iranian. That is why, as @vsdoc pointed out, there are remarkable similarities, down to the point where to understand the Zend Avesta properly, it helped to know the Rg Vedic language (not Sanskrit), and to understand the nuances of the Rg Veda, it helps to know Avestan.

Second, Sanskrit is on a branch relative to the other modern Indian languages. That is, Sanskrit is Vedic Indo-Aryan codified by a genius named Panini in around 600 BC, somewhere in the vicinity of Takshashila. From that point on, Sanskrit was quite fixed, and was immutable. Not that changes in style could not be detected; they could, and that is how people determine the age of different Sanskrit works. However, it was not the root stock of modern Indian languages.

Modern Indian languages are derived from generally five sources (except one freak case).

1. Most western Indian languages in north India are derived from Suraseni Prakrit. That is the root stock of all the languages that our village idiot mentioned, including Punjabi, Potohari, Pahari and Kashmiri; it was not the root stock of many others. Suraseni Prakrit in turn was derived from Indo-Aryan, the original language of the Vedas, and existed parallel to Sanskrit.
2. Most eastern Indian languages in north India, up to Assamese, are derived from Magadhi Prakrit, another variation of Prakrit. Many of them share a common script, misleadingly known as Bengali script.
3. Languages to the east of Assamese are generally of Tibeto-Burmese origin, part of the Sinic language family.
4. Throughout northern and southern India, and in Bangladesh as well, there are remainders of probably the oldest language common to all of India, members of the Austro-Asiatic languages family, specifically of the Munda languages.
5. The whole of south India, south of the Godavari, is dominated by Dravidian languages, seven of them, with four prominent ones, Tamizh, Malayalam (southern Dravidian), and Telugu and Kannada (northern Dravidian).
6. Burashaski is the freak case.

Coming to Urdu, Urdu is the language, the patois, that evolved in military camps, hence the name, from the word for camp. It was essentially the language of the land embellished with loan words, with words for specific techniques, such as riding....

@Joe Shearer

We labour .

No reason you should not put your shoulder into it from time to time.

Who knows, a seed may actually germinate .

Doubtful.

But hope springs eternal in the human breast.

 

[Shamain]

If you want a serious discussion, you might like to try laying off the hate speech. On the other hand......

no one wnats a serious discussion with u because u are a foulmouthed person who seeks online attention, all ur posts are littered with personal insults....but then all that makes me pity u more.
Tch tch..

Thank Heavens you posted. I was beginning to lose my grip on sanity.

Yeah and i know this is the origin of these languages...so??? Now who is the village idiot here who is getting his lungi in twist over nothing. Find better job then senselessly quoting me over the forum...or actually just dont.... i like watching u go bent out of shape over my posts. So yeahhhh boooooo!!!!!

Try not to be an idiot. You obviously know nothing about the languages in question. If at all they can be called two different languages.

Oh just cut it out...majority of those words in original post arent part of hindi and many have been borrowed from urdu to make hindi sound closer to urdu....and its now that these words have become better known in india due to ballywood crap movies.
Unless u love stealing others languages , u got no claim on those words . So shoooooo!

Just look at the grammar and you will get the point.

Grammar???? Buahahha ....ur people dont even know the masculine and feminine form of nouns and other verbs we use in urdu. The inflections,conjugations.
You guys literally say gaari band ho jaey ga, darakht kat jaey geee.
So much for grammar.
Yeahhh i know u are obsessed with urdu and pakistanis.

Now even the village idiot has an opinion on the matter.

I like how you define yourself on the forummmmmm

There are some levels of ignorance against which one is quite helpless. This sob sister is one of those outstandingly ignorant persons. Really a benchmark.

Awwwww donttt cryyyyyyyy , i dont have extra tissue papers for you. I hate wasting my stock on useless people.

They had Abraham Lincoln speaking Malayalam, under the impression that was a language similar to Urdu, Hindi, Punjabi, Potohari, Pahari, Koshur or Kashmiri - the lot. They don't have even the bare elements of knowledge about the subject, but think they can make up for it with missionary zeal.

Nd this is how thick u are that u assumed i am treating dravadian languages ,hindi and urdu, pahari,koshur, brushaski,shina, punjabi as one. Duh!!!
It will be nice if once in a while u put ur brain to some use. Tho that will still be useless.

Just to illustrate how ignorant is ignorant.

.

Or just to illustrate how much i left someone seething and shifting in his place. Laggi laggi.

 

[Spectre]

To be honest, looking at each and every post preceding this is quite meaningless. Let me summarise it for your sake; the others can honestly go hang.

First, Persian and Indo-Aryan (not Sanskrit) are from the same identical language, Indo-Iranian. That is why, as @vsdoc pointed out, there are remarkable similarities, down to the point where to understand the Zend Avesta properly, it helped to know the Rg Vedic language (not Sanskrit), and to understand the nuances of the Rg Veda, it helps to know Avestan.

Second, Sanskrit is on a branch relative to the other modern Indian languages. That is, Sanskrit is Vedic Indo-Aryan codified by a genius named Panini in around 600 BC, somewhere in the vicinity of Takshashila. From that point on, Sanskrit was quite fixed, and was immutable. Not that changes in style could not be detected; they could, and that is how people determine the age of different Sanskrit works. However, it was not the root stock of modern Indian languages.

Modern Indian languages are derived from generally five sources (except one freak case).

1. Most western Indian languages in north India are derived from Suraseni Prakrit. That is the root stock of all the languages that our village idiot mentioned, including Punjabi, Potohari, Pahari and Kashmiri; it was not the root stock of many others. Suraseni Prakrit in turn was derived from Indo-Aryan, the original language of the Vedas, and existed parallel to Sanskrit.
2. Most eastern Indian languages in north India, up to Assamese, are derived from Magadhi Prakrit, another variation of Prakrit. Many of them share a common script, misleadingly known as Bengali script.
3. Languages to the east of Assamese are generally of Tibeto-Burmese origin, part of the Sinic language family.
4. Throughout northern and southern India, and in Bangladesh as well, there are remainders of probably the oldest language common to all of India, members of the Austro-Asiatic languages family, specifically of the Munda languages.
5. The whole of south India, south of the Godavari, is dominated by Dravidian languages, seven of them, with four prominent ones, Tamizh, Malayalam (southern Dravidian), and Telugu and Kannada (northern Dravidian).
6. Burashaski is the freak case.

Thanks, cleared a lot of misconceptions I have had.

 

[darksider]

Try not to be an idiot. You obviously know nothing about the languages in question. If at all they can be called two different languages.



Just look at the grammar and you will get the point.



Would you like to explain what is the difference between Urdu 'words' and Hindi 'words'? If you had said 'nouns', I would not have objected.



Now even the village idiot has an opinion on the matter.



There are some levels of ignorance against which one is quite helpless. This sob sister is one of those outstandingly ignorant persons. Really a benchmark.



Did you read what the imbeciles came out with earlier, Doc? This is staggering. Can they be for real?



The relationship is a little less direct than you might imagine, although what you have said is correct.



Don't even bother.

They had Abraham Lincoln speaking Malayalam, under the impression that was a language similar to Urdu, Hindi, Punjabi, Potohari, Pahari, Koshur or Kashmiri - the lot. They don't have even the bare elements of knowledge about the subject, but think they can make up for it with missionary zeal.



Just to illustrate how ignorant is ignorant.



.....And of course, the chorus.....

saying idiots to others will not change the reality.
its show your mentality and how desperate indians are to change the name of urdu to hindi.

 

[Joe Shearer]

saying idiots to others will not change the reality.
its show your mentality and how desperate indians are to change the name of urdu to hindi.

I beg your pardon. I am not at all in the business of linguistic jingoism. And there was nothing in all that I explained, none of which you have even tried to refute except with a mild bleat of protest, that changes the name of Urdu to Hindi.

no one wnats a serious discussion with u because u are a foulmouthed person who seeks online attention, all ur posts are littered with personal insults....but then all that makes me pity u more.
Tch tch..

An understandable conclusion, from your point of view, because I seriously think that your posts are among the most stupid that I have had the misfortune to deal with. So that is why my posts are littered with personal insults when it comes to your posts, because I hate stupid. Keep pitying, or doing whatever else you want to do; just don't post silly things.

Yeah and i know this is the origin of these languages...so???

You know this is the origin of these languages? Which languages? As far as you are concerned, they are all an alphabet soup. There is no evidence in any single one of your posts that you know which language belongs to which group, or that there are wide gaps between Arabic and Persian and Turkic, or that Persian and Hindi belong to the same language family. Just saying, after you have been found in all your ignorance, that you knew all along hardly cuts it.

Now who is the village idiot here who is getting his lungi in twist over nothing. Find better job then senselessly quoting me over the forum...or actually just dont.... i like watching u go bent out of shape over my posts. So yeahhhh boooooo!!!!!

Umm, the village idiot remains the same. Hint: have you a mirror nearby?
You said and did nothing that upgrades your status; you remain the village idiot. And it won't change till your level of knowledge changes.

Oh just cut it out...majority of those words in original post arent part of hindi and many have been borrowed from urdu to make hindi sound closer to urdu....and its now that these words have become better known in india due to ballywood crap movies.
Unless u love stealing others languages , u got no claim on those words . So shoooooo!

Just proves my point.

English has tons of loan words; that doesn't make the language French, or German, or even Hindi, considering the original sources of those words.

Of course most of the words in the original post were not Hindi; they were grafts onto the original grammatical structure - it has been noted that you don't particularly relish grammar, or mentions of grammar - but that makes it a variation of the grafted original. Not a separate language. No more than using words of French or German origin makes English either equal to French or to German, or makes one person's English more or less English than another person's.

I frankly doubt that you have the intellect to even understand what is going on. It is difficult, I admit, to rise above schoolgirl chatter and sniping to coping with a problem with one's thinking. It will take some a long time, perhaps their whole lives, on the present evidence.

Grammar???? Buahahha ....ur people dont even know the masculine and feminine form of nouns and other verbs we use in urdu. The inflections,conjugations.
You guys literally say gaari band ho jaey ga, darakht kat jaey geee.
So much for grammar.
Yeahhh i know u are obsessed with urdu and pakistanis.

So much for your knowledge.

You obviously don't know that there are literally dozens of languages which do not follow the same forms of masculine and feminine as Hindi does - or as Urdu does in an identical manner. When someone from a different language background - a Tamilian, for instance, or a Bengali - speaks either Hindi or Urdu, he or she makes the kind of mistake that, to you, forms the essence of linguistics.

I like how you define yourself on the forummmmmm

You should edit your posts more carefully. A few comments earlier, you admitted your being the village idiot in question. You should have deleted that.

Still not too late. Think how smart it will make you look.

Awwwww donttt cryyyyyyyy , i dont have extra tissue papers for you. I hate wasting my stock on useless people.

It is true, your posts do make me cry. If you were one of my students, I would commit suicide.

Nd this is how thick u are that u assumed i am treating dravadian languages ,hindi and urdu, pahari,koshur, brushaski,shina, punjabi as one. Duh!!!

No evidence that you know the difference. Think of your reference to Abraham Lincoln. If you had any sense, you wouldn't drag in Malayalam into a discussion on the difference between Urdu and Hindi. Since you don't, it got dragged in.

It will be nice if once in a while u put ur brain to some use. Tho that will still be useless.

Or just to illustrate how much i left someone seething and shifting in his place. Laggi laggi.

Yes, very meaningful contributions. By your standards.

 

[denel]

Firstly,this is not language pollution(.Talking specifically about urdu).Urdu is such a language which has evolved from its pure form into a vary beautiful language inheriting other beautiful words from different regional as well as foreign languaes like persian,pushto,arabic,turkic and in more recent times ENGLISH.So this is certainly not ``language pollution``.
I can give a few examples of common urdu words derived or rather taken words from english.e.gJug,glass,pipes,bulb,tubelights,switch,etc.These are just some of the random words which had been taken from english directly into urdu and these words along with hunderds of other words have been fully absorbed into urdu.
Hope you got my point.

I tend to disagree, what a language needs is to have linguistics fellows who add new words to a language.
What I observe is full sentences just intermixed all the way across. I love languages and study them. When a language gets polluted to this level, it may just as well get replaced in its entire form. A language is beautiful in its context not with cross pollution. For example if i study Urdu or Farsi - the differences are stark - in the later new words are added by linguistics department created just for this purpose in Teheran. Is there a focus in ensuring that this happens in Urdu? If Farsi words are the bulk, the beauty lies in using them. A late friend who was from Pakistan noted to me upon this phenomena was primarily lack of self esteem and discontinuing of Farsi as a language of study in the schools. He had suggest i listen to BBC Urdu service to get the best context in how the language is actually spoken. BBC Hindi service which precedes the broadcast, i cannot understand anything as I think sanskirit words are used with 99% of them being uncomprehensive to me.

I like eastern philosophers especially Rumi, Hafiz, Iqbal, Firdous and hence have tried to study the languages to understand the original context unlike try to read the translation. If I use Iqbal as a basis of the best form of Urdu, then i see the languge gravitating to Farsi in context, thought, stanza, and depth; hence the beauty of prose and syntax when using farsi base remains its strength. So to see it literally dying away, i find it as. Again, if I as an outsider can appreciate the depth of your language, why is then your own people losing it. Probably in my lifetime, if i were to speak Urdu using Farsi base, i suspect it might no longer be understood.

I see similar tendencies in Tswana across the border in Botswana; there is debate in parliament already to address this challenge and youth are no longer recognising original words as they have been substituted by English in a brutal manner. Similarly also with Kiswahili which is heavily influenced by Arabic and taarab music and literature inheriting from parent form; i am appalled to see the pollution starting to occur since the 90s when Swahili as a common core language started to lose sponsor ship of the state in Tanzania. Swahili is akin to Urdu in being a lingua franca as a language of trade.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Joe Shearer]

A really interesting contribution, although personally I don't agree.

I tend to disagree, what a language needs is to have linguistics fellows who add new words to a language.
What I observe is full sentences just intermixed all the way across. I love languages and study them. When a language gets polluted to this level, it may just as well get replaced in its entire form. A language is beautiful in its context not with cross pollution. For example if i study Urdu or Farsi - the differences are stark - in the later new words are added by linguistics department created just for this purpose in Teheran. Is there a focus in ensuring that this happens in Urdu? If Farsi words are the bulk, the beauty lies in using them. A late friend who was from Pakistan noted to me upon this phenomena was primarily lack of self esteem and discontinuing of Farsi as a language of study in the schools.

I shall confine my comments to your words above for the time being.

Were you aware of the origins of Urdu? Those origins would explain a great deal about the language.

I like eastern philosophers especially Rumi, Hafiz, Iqbal and hence have tried to study the languages to understand the original context unlike try to read the translation. If I use Iqbal as a basis of the best form of Urdu, then i see the languge gravitating to Farsi in context and thought and depth; hence the beauty of prose and syntax when using farsi base remains its strength. So to see it literally dying away, i find it as. Again, if I as an outsider can appreciate the depth of your language, why is then your own people losing it. Probably in my lifetime, if i were to speak urdu using Farsi base, i suspect it might no longer be understood.

I see similar tendencies in Tswana across the border in Botswana; there is debate in parliament already to address this challenge and youth are no longer recognising original words as they have been substituted by English in a brutal manner. Similarly also with Kiswahili which is heavily influenced by Arabic and taarab music and literature inheriting from parent form; i am appalled to see the pollution starting to occur since the 90s when Swahili as a common core language started to lose sponsor ship of the state in Tanzania. Swahili is akin to Urdu in being a lingua franca as a language of trade.

Just my 2 cents.[/QUOTE]

Not to derail an very interesting lingustic thread - i speak 6 languages - my question is as follows:

On the C-band dish i have i receive a lot of asian channels from across entire Asian continent. When I have IRINN, I dont hear any single english word in Farsi, yet when I tuned to Indian channels, they have 70% english/30local language words mixed up to the point of annoyance not to mention the twisted accent. Similarly, i receive Dawn channel and a few others from Pakistan, the same trend. I see the same issue with Moroccan version of arabic with mixture of french.

Is there a problem with these volks that they cannot speak their own languages correctly that they have to mix in English? In our local Tswana, Sotho, Zulu, afrikaans etc, english words and substitution just does not occur. Is there an inferior complex. If you want to speak English, then bloody well speak English, if you speak Hindi or Urdu or Arabic or whatever, then just speak that language. This language pollution is pathetic.

Sorry to derail - I am trying to point out whether it is Urdu or Hindi, I see it completely now polluted with English to the point of complete corruption. If you want to speak a language, speak it in its entirity.

You make some interesting observations.

I would imagine that some of the sources you have been listening to are popular talk shows or news broadcasts. On those shows, there is a tendency to speak 'down to earth', or whatever the person speaking imagines is down to earth. This usually brings in its train a lot of intrusive words and phrases.

 

[Ray_of_Hope]

I tend to disagree, what a language needs is to have linguistics fellows who add new words to a language.
What I observe is full sentences just intermixed all the way across. I love languages and study them. When a language gets polluted to this level, it may just as well get replaced in its entire form. A language is beautiful in its context not with cross pollution. For example if i study Urdu or Farsi - the differences are stark - in the later new words are added by linguistics department created just for this purpose in Teheran. Is there a focus in ensuring that this happens in Urdu? If Farsi words are the bulk, the beauty lies in using them. A late friend who was from Pakistan noted to me upon this phenomena was primarily lack of self esteem and discontinuing of Farsi as a language of study in the schools. He had suggest i listen to BBC Urdu service to get the best context in how the language is actually spoken. BBC Hindi service which precedes the broadcast, i cannot understand anything as I think sanskirit words are used with 99% of them being uncomprehensive to me.

I like eastern philosophers especially Rumi, Hafiz, Iqbal, Firdous and hence have tried to study the languages to understand the original context unlike try to read the translation. If I use Iqbal as a basis of the best form of Urdu, then i see the languge gravitating to Farsi in context, thought, stanza, and depth; hence the beauty of prose and syntax when using farsi base remains its strength. So to see it literally dying away, i find it as. Again, if I as an outsider can appreciate the depth of your language, why is then your own people losing it. Probably in my lifetime, if i were to speak Urdu using Farsi base, i suspect it might no longer be understood.

I see similar tendencies in Tswana across the border in Botswana; there is debate in parliament already to address this challenge and youth are no longer recognising original words as they have been substituted by English in a brutal manner. Similarly also with Kiswahili which is heavily influenced by Arabic and taarab music and literature inheriting from parent form; i am appalled to see the pollution starting to occur since the 90s when Swahili as a common core language started to lose sponsor ship of the state in Tanzania. Swahili is akin to Urdu in being a lingua franca as a language of trade.

Just my 2 cents.

I dont quite agree with having a department for adding or removing words from a language.Its a slow process of evolution and should be done over the matter of years and not just by a single department.
Though i agree with u that now a days,people (moslty those of the elite class) have begun using too much english words in urdu.Thats cuz of a number of reasons including studying from english medium of instruction schools/colleges and ignoring urdu alltogether.But the main problem we r facing in Pakistan is that speaking english is now considered synonymous with being well educated and even though when someone does not know english,he/sge would still try to speak a few english words and sentences to impress the listener.
Now the reason of the above mentioned problem is not the absence of proper urdu words but this trend of speaking english to be seen as well educated.

 

[denel]

I dont quite agree with having a department for adding or removing words from a language.Its a slow process of evolution and should be done over the matter of years and not just by a single department.
Though i agree with u that now a days,people (moslty those of the elite class) have begun using too much english words in urdu.Thats cuz of a number of reasons including studying from english medium of instruction schools/colleges and ignoring urdu alltogether.But the main problem we r facing in Pakistan is that speaking english is now considered synonymous with being well educated and even though when someone does not know english,he/sge would still try to speak a few english words and sentences to impress the listener.
Now the reason of the above mentioned problem is not the absence of proper urdu words but this trend of speaking english to be seen as well educated.

There can be multiple departments as in the case here in local languages. My late friend's thoughts are then correctly reflected in your notes e.g. lack of self esteem by the populous. That is definitely very very sad. The language in its proper usage will then pass away into oblivion.

Knowing English does not mean educated regretfully. For example my colleagues who are at Bar Ilan University and some who are at Stellenbosch who are world renounced academics but they have hardly a care in the world for English. They speak Hebrew and afrikaans without a care in the world for English. It is great to see that. In Bar Ilan, none of their formal mathematics papers are written in English; there is a translator at hand who does it for them for publishing.

Late here. must go to sleep...

 

[Ray_of_Hope]

There can be multiple departments as in the case here in local languages. My late friend's thoughts are then correctly reflected in your notes e.g. lack of self esteem by the populous. That is definitely very very sad. The language in its proper usage will then pass away into oblivion.

Knowing English does not mean educated regretfully. For example my colleagues who are at Bar Ilan University and some who are at Stellenbosch who are world renounced academics but they have hardly a care in the world for English. They speak Hebrew and afrikaans without a care in the world for English. It is great to see that. In Bar Ilan, none of their formal mathematics papers are written in English; there is a translator at hand who does it for them for publishing.

Late here. must go to sleep...

As i already said,languages cannot and should not be altered by departments.Yes,those departments can add words officially into the language.But who'd make the masses to use those words.
But i am still very confident about the future of urdu as intermixing of english into it is only the case with the young elite.Most of the pakistanis speak pure urdu.And with the feclaration of Urdu as the official language of Pakistan,I see its future very bright.
P.S.Good night.Its already too late here.So i gotta go too.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Slavs have a lot Iranic loan words , some people actually suggest that Slavs separated from Balto-Slavic continuum under Scythian influence. Even Slavic word for "wanderer" - "Skitinitsa" derives from Slavic name for Scythians (Skiti) which is testament of their nomadic way of life.

Hindu and Slavic religion:

Hindu Svarga - Slavic Svarog

Hindu Shiva - Slavic Zhiva(na)

Hindu Vala - Slavic Veles etc.

I think both Scythians and Sarmatians had been later assimilated by the Slavs.

The Scythians have become the Russian Cossacks, while the Sarmatians have become the Polish Hussars.