I’m grateful to remnant13 for introducing me to the work of Otto von Sadovszky.
Otto J. von Sadovszky (July 3, 1925 – May 12, 2004) was a Hungarian American anthropologist who worked at California State University, Fullerton in southern California for most of his career until his retirement.
Personally, I simply remember a fascinating professor who could speak nearly two hundred languages, including a few so-called “dead” ones.
He was an honorable man with an impressive and jovial character who is held in high esteem by many.
Sadovszky was born in Hungary and was very aware of the curious historical heritage the mainstream has developed for his mother tongue.
Hungarian is the official language of Hungary and one of the 24 official languages of the European Union.
Like Finnish and Estonian, it belongs to the Uralic language family, its closest relatives being Mansi and Khanty.
It is one of the several European languages not part of the Indo-European languages.
It is thought that Hungarian separated from its Ugric relatives in the first half of the 1st millennium b.c.e., in western Siberia, east of the southern Urals.
The Uralic languages constitute a language family of 38 languages spoken by approximately 25 million people, predominantly in Northern Eurasia.
Sadovszky was also aware of the curiously controversial heritage of the Hungarian Language Group [aka Uralic languages] in the Old World.
Indo-Uralic is a proposed language family consisting of Indo-European and Uralic.
A genetic relationship between Indo-European and Uralic was first proposed by the Danish linguist Vilhelm Thomsen in 1869 (Pedersen 1931:336) but was received with little enthusiasm.
Since then, the predominant opinion in the linguistic community has remained that the evidence for such a relationship is insufficient.
However, quite a few prominent linguists have always taken the contrary view (e.g. Henry Sweet, Holger Pedersen, Björn Collinder, Warren Cowgill, Jochem Schindler, Eugene Helimski and Gert Klingenschmitt).
The Dravidian family has defied all of the attempts to show a connection with other languages, including Indo-European, Hurrian, Basque, Sumerian, and Korean.
Comparisons have been made not just with the other language families of the Indian subcontinent (Indo-European, Austroasiatic, Sino-Tibetan, and Nihali), but with all typologically similar language families of the Old World.
Nonetheless, although there are no readily detectable genealogical connections, Dravidian shares strong areal features with the Indo-Aryan languages, which have been attributed to a substratum influence from Dravidian.
Dravidian languages display typological similarities with the Uralic language group, suggesting to some a prolonged period of contact in the past.
Dravidian is one of the primary language families in the 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 Ice Age and the emergence of proto-Indo-European 4–6 thousand years BCE.
Ural–Altaic, Uralo-Altaic or Uraltaic, also known as Turanian, is an obsolete language-family proposal uniting the Uralic and Altaic languages.
Originally suggested in the 19th century, the hypothesis remained debated into the mid 20th century, often with disagreements exacerbated by pan-nationalist agendas, enjoyed its greatest popularity by the proponents in Britain.
Since the 1960s, the hypothesis has been widely rejected.
Danish philologist Rasmus Christian Rask described what he vaguely called “Scythian” languages in 1834, which included Finno-Ugric, Turkic, Samoyedic, Eskimo, Caucasian, Basque and others.
The hypothesis [clarification needed] was elaborated at least as early as 1836 by W. Schott and in 1838 by F. J. Wiedemann.
The “Altaic” hypothesis, as mentioned by Finnish linguist and explorer Matthias Castrén by 1844, included Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic, collectively known as “Chudic”, and Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic, collectively known as “Tataric”.
Subsequently, Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic came to be referred to as Altaic languages, whereas Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic were called Uralic.
The similarities between these two families led to their retention in a common grouping, named Ural–Altaic.
In Hungary the idea of the Ural–Altaic relationship remained widely implicitly accepted in the late 19th and the mid-20th century, though more out of pan-nationalist than linguistic reasons, and without much detailed research carried out.
Uralic–Yukaghir is a proposed language family composed of Uralic and Yukaghir. It is also known as Uralo-Yukaghir.
Yukaghir is a small family of languages spoken in eastern Siberia.
It formerly extended over a much wider area (Collinder 1965:30).
It consists of two languages, Tundra Yukaghir and Kolyma Yukaghir.
Nostratic is a macrofamily, or hypothetical large-scale language family, that includes many of the indigenous language families of Eurasia, although its exact composition and structure vary among proponents.
In its more restricted, current form, it includes the Indo-European, Uralic, Altaic and Kartvelian languages.
Often also included are the Afroasiatic languages native to North Africa, the Horn of Africa, the Arabian Peninsula and the Near East, and the Dravidian languages of the Indian Subcontinent (sometimes also Elamo-Dravidian, which connects India and the Iranian Plateau).
The hypothetical ancestral language of the Nostratic family is called Proto-Nostratic.
The Nostratic hypothesis originates with Holger Pedersen in the early 20th century.
The name “Nostratic” is due to Pedersen (1903), derived from the Latin nostrates “fellow countrymen”.
The hypothesis was significantly expanded in the 1960s by Soviet linguists, notably Vladislav Illich-Svitych and Aharon Dolgopolsky, termed the “Moscovite school” by Bomhard (2008, 2011, and 2014), and it has received renewed attention in English-speaking academia since the 1990s.
The hypothesis is controversial and has varying degrees of acceptance amongst linguists worldwide.
More importantly, Sadovszky became acutely aware of the curiously controversial heritage of the Hungarian Language Group [aka Uralic languages] in the New World.
The Eskimo–Uralic hypothesis posits that the Uralic and Eskimo–Aleut language families belong to a common language family of which they are the two branches.
Although substantial arguments for the hypothesis have been made, it is not generally accepted by linguists.
The best-known advocate of the Eskimo–Uralic hypothesis is Knut Bergsland.
The hypothesis dates back to the pioneering Danish linguist Rasmus Rask in 1818, upon noticing similarities between Greenlandic Eskimo and Finnish.
There has long been speculation about relationships of Eskimo and/or Aluet with a variety of other language groupings of the world.
The oldest such hypothesis is the Eskimo(-Aleut)-Ural(-Alta-)ic, which was suggested in fact in 1576 by Martin Frobischer at the very first contact with Eskimo.
It was taken up again in various forms during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries by half a dozen scholars, ans more importantly and elaborately during the twentieth century by C. C. Uhlenbeck, who was a student of Eskimo, in a series of articles between 1905 and 1941, and by A. Sauvageot, who was not a student of Eskimo, in a number of publications from 1924 to 1953.
Knut Bergsland, himself an expert also in Uralic as well as Eskimo and Aleut, took up the question in an important article in 1956, and then in 1959 reviewed very competently the whole subject and its history and bibliography in a paper which itself remains by far the most important discussion of the hypothesis in print.
Eskimo-Aleut – Michael E. Krauss
Native Languages of the Americas – Volume 1 – Editor: Thomas Sebeok
Uralo-Siberian is a hypothetical language family consisting of Uralic, Yukaghir, Chukotko-Kamchatkan and Eskimo–Aleut.
It was proposed in 1998 by Michael Fortescue, an expert in Eskimo–Aleut and Chukotko-Kamchatkan, in his book Language Relations across Bering Strait.
The hypothesis has not gained wide acceptance.
In 2011, Fortescue removed Chukotko-Kamchatkan from the proposal.
Between the 1850s and 1870s, there were efforts by Frederick Roehrig to including some Native American languages in a “Turanian” or “Ural-Altaic” family, and between the 1870s and 1890s speculations about links with Basque.
Eurasiatic is a proposed language macrofamily that would include many language families historically spoken in northern, western, and southern Eurasia.
The idea of a Eurasiatic superfamily dates back more than 100 years.
Joseph Greenberg’s proposal, dating to the 1990s, is the most widely discussed version.
In 2013, Mark Pagel and three colleagues published what they believe to be statistical evidence for a Eurasiatic language family.
The branches of Eurasiatic vary between proposals, but typically include Altaic (in the form of Mongolic, Tungusic and Turkic), Chukchi-Kamchatkan, Eskimo–Aleut, Indo-European, and Uralic – although Greenberg uses the controversial Uralic-Yukaghir classification instead.
Other branches sometimes included are the Kartvelian and Dravidian families, as proposed by Pagel et al., in addition to the language isolates Nivkh, Etruscan and Greenberg’s “Korean-Japanese-Ainu.”
Some proposals group Eurasiatic with even larger macrofamilies, such as Nostratic; again, many other professional linguists regard the methods used as invalid.
Otto von Sadovszky added to this controversial heritage in the New World when he inadvertently discovered a linguistic relationship between the Uralic languages of central Siberia and the Penutian group of languages from [predominantly] Washington, Oregon, and California.
After leaving Europe for the United States to study Sanskrit at UC Berkeley he met a graduate student in linguistics who was studying Miwok, and Sadovszky found that he could understand many of the terms from Miwok, a language of the Penutian group, despite having no training in it, due to the familiarity of many of the terms to Uralic languages from central Siberia he had studied earlier in Europe which were related to his native Hungarian.
Not many American linguistic scholars have shown much interest in the origins and
migrations of the parent languages of contemporary Native Americans.
One such example is the Penutian language group of Central California.
Otto, as he related to me, inadvertently discovered the link between these languages and the Ural-Altaic family.
He recounted his experiences when he first attended graduate school at U. C. Berkeley, after earning degrees in Europe and coming to the states to study Sanskrit.
He shared an office with a fellow doctoral student in linguistics, whose desk was covered with pages of material on the Miwok or Maidu Indians.
Perusing these pages, he later asked her if he was correct in identifying the meaning of countless words and phrases.
He was told that he was amazingly correct in a majority of instances, considering that he admitted to having limited knowledge of American Indians.
Otto von Sadovszky 1925 – 2004
Submitted by: Imre Sutton, Professor Emeritus, Geography (CSU Fullerton) – 2010
Penutian is a proposed grouping of language families that includes many Native American languages of western North America, predominantly spoken at one time in Washington, Oregon, and California.
The existence of a Penutian stock or phylum has been the subject of debate among specialists. Even the unity of some of its component families has been disputed.
The Miwok or Miwokan languages, also known as Moquelumnan, are a group of endangered languages spoken in central California in the Sierra Nevada.
Maiduan (also Maidun, Pujunan) is a small endangered language family of northeastern California.
If we were to state that the ancient populace of California were Hungarian, this would cause immediate concern among those historians who, under the scientific aegis of the Hungarian Academy of Science, boldly state that they are the experts, and we would be declared to be chauvinistic Hungarians, chasing rainbows.
In this way, they would continue to denigrate the research of ancient Hungarian origins in order to preserve the superiority of the Finno-Ugric theory.
Historians from the Successor States follow this example so that they may continue to retain the territories which they received at the Treaty of Trianon and which, according to International Law, they occupy illegally, although this is not widely recognized.
Yet they should know that historical truth cannot be suppressed forever.
The Discovery of California: Breaking the Silence of the Siberia to America Migrators
Nearly one quarter of a century ago, I set out to remove this towering sound muffler, silencer and language mixer between America and Eurasia.
In those days, I thought that I discerned faint sounds from a distant land, indicating a remote linguistic relationship between two continents.
Today, beyond all my expectations, the vast amount of comparative linguistic evidence speaks loudly, illuminating all aspects of the culture of the Californian Indians.
What I discovered was a very similar language spoken by the Californian Indians while they were crossing the Bering Strait from Asia into America.
For the first time, the silent pre-historic migrators began to speak and, for the first time, we can understand what they are saying to us of their adventurous cross-continental journey to their new home in America.
We have only to listen.
For too long, false assumptions distracted linguists from the truth of the data all around – from the ahistoric nature of the California Indian, to the similarities between Siberia and California.
The Discovery of California: Breaking the Silence of the Siberia to America Migrators
Otto Sadovszky – The Californians – Nov-Dec 1984
Otto von Sadovszky’s controversial observations became known as the Cal-Ugrian Theory.
Sadovszky elaborates the Cal-Ugrian theory in his book.
The theory describes the relationship between Native American languages in California and languages spoken in Siberia which according to Sadovszky is based on more than 10,000 different words and grammatical traits.
The Indian languages were or are spoken in an area along the Northern California coast from Bodega Bay to Big Sur as well as along the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers, and by 6,000 Mansi and 17,000 Khanty, east of the Urals.
The Discovery of California: A Cal-Ugrian Comparative Study
Otto von Sadovszky – 1996
Evidence gathered from physical anthropology, archeology, and comparative ethnology clearly indicates that the American Indians are of Asian origin.
Since the discovery of America, now more than 500 years ago, various scholars have been searching for linguistic links between the Native American languages and the languages of Eurasia. In this work the author proposes a comprehensive linguistic relationship between the Central California Indian languages and the Uralic language family.
The volume contains an essay concerning the discovery of California written for a well-informed public, a great amount of ethnographic material, an extensive comparative grammar and phonology, several vocabularies and a comparative linguistic analysis of a shamanistic text.
The author introduces a new word ‘Cal-Ugrian’. It stands for California Ugrian. It represents a new concept in comparative culture and linguistics. The author trusts that the reader, after carefully having studied the evidence, will agree that the languages of Native Central Californians are indeed closely related to the Uralic, Finno-Ugrian and specifically the Ugrian languages spoken in Northwest Siberia.
Távoli nyelvrokonok Kaliforniában?
Nyelv És Tudomány – nyest.hu
The Ob River, also Obi, is a major river in western Siberia, Russia and is the world’s seventh-longest river. It forms at the confluence of the Biya and Katun Rivers which have their origins in the Altay Mountains.
It is the westernmost of the three great Siberian rivers that flow into the Arctic Ocean (the other two being the Yenisei River and the Lena River).
The Gulf of Ob is the world’s longest estuary.
Unsurprisingly, the Cal-Ugrian Theory is “not well accepted in the United States” because [amongst other things] Sadovszky suggested some California tribes arrived only 3,000 years ago.
One claim of Sadovszky’s theory is that the ancestors of some California tribes arrived only 3,000 years ago, which is much more recently than the origin of most tribes in the Americas which according to the generally accepted theory regarding the settlement of the Americas date their original migrations to around 20,000 years ago across the Bering Strait.
In contrast, the migration around 1,000 B.C.E. would have occurred from the Ob river delta across the Arctic Ocean in summer months and down the American coast.
The Cal-Ugrian theory was not well accepted in the United States, with some linguists noting that he was not trained in comparative linguistics although he had done some fieldwork among California Indians.
As a result, his book was published abroad, and the upshot was that he gained a reputation for his knowledge of Indo-European and Uralic languages but more so in Europe than in the United States.
Evidence for a relatively recent marine migration is very limited, but Sadovszky claims that archaeological and other evidence back up the linguistic evidence of his theory but there has been little interest in further research in this area.
A catastrophic interpretation of Sadovszky’s Cal-Ugrian Theory might suggest the Penutian Language Group is a cultural legacy from Laramidia – just as the Algonquian Language Group is a cultural legacy from Appalachia.
Laramidia was an island continent that existed during the Late Cretaceous period (99.6–66 Ma), when the Western Interior Seaway split the continent of North America in two.
In the Mesozoic era, Laramidia was an island land mass separated from Appalachia to the east by the Western Interior Seaway.
The Algic (also Algonquian–Wiyot–Yurok or Algonquian–Ritwan) languages are an indigenous language family of North America.
Most Algic languages belong to the Algonquian family, dispersed over a broad area from the Rocky Mountains to Atlantic Canada.
The other Algic languages are the Yurok and Wiyot of northwestern California, which, despite their geographic proximity, are not closely related.
The Algonquian languages are a subfamily of Native American languages which includes most of the languages in the Algic language family.
The proto-language from which all of the languages of the family descend, Proto-Algonquian, was spoken around 2,500 to 3,000 years ago.
There is no scholarly consensus about where this language was spoken.
This catastrophic interpretation of Sadovszky’s Cal-Ugrian Theory is broadly supported by the Y-DNA evidence.
Haplogroup Q or Q-M242 is a Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup.
It has one primary subclade, Haplogroup Q1 (L232/S432), which includes numerous subclades that have been sampled and identified in males among modern populations.
Q-M242 is the predominant Y-DNA haplogroup among Native Americans and in some regions of Central Asia and Northern Siberia.
While the mtDNA evidence provides broad support for the proposed Indo-Uralic language group arriving in the Americas as a second wave of emigration Out of India.
Echoes of these two waves of emigration can be found in Greenland and Henry O’Brien’s  history of Ireland whilst providing support for P. N. Oak’s “world empire” that “spoke Sanskrit”.
The duration of Tuath-de-danaan supremacy may have been some six centuries, dating from the first battle of Moytura, in B.C. 1202, to the second battle, in or about B.C. 600, between the Firbolgs, or Celts (who had been gradually reasserting themselves), and a reinforcement of Tuath-de-danaans, coming this time, not from Persia, but from India, whence they had been expelled by the Brahmins.
Although this second invasion proved successful, the power of the Tuath-de-danaans was now on the wane, and the height of civilisation to which they had raised the island rapidly declined before the inroads of the Scythians.
Their ritual became merged in that of the Druids, and their taste for letters vitiated.
The Round Towers of Ireland – Henry O’Brien – 1898 Edition
It is also unknown that in the remote forgotten past the Hindus i.e. the Aryans had a world empire and that the world then spoke Sanskrit.
That is why most people in the world call themselves Aryans and speak Sanskritized languages like Latin and Persian.
To call European languages and others like Persian and Pashtu Indo-Aryan is a terminological monstrosity.
Because, if, according to blundering Western concepts Aryans spread all over the world, including India, from outside India, European languages and Persian and Pashtu should have been called Aryan languages and not Indo-Aryan.
Since those languages are all of Sanskritic origin they must be termed not Indo-Aryan but simply as Indian or Aryan or Sanskritic .
All those three terms mean the same thing.
Some Missing Chapters of World History – P. N. Oak – 2010 Edition
I don’t expect this catastrophic interpretation will become “well accepted” either.