Re: [tied] for ignorants

Piotr, do you include the language of Novgorod Slovenes into Krivichian subgroup?

I'm not sure that this is correct. Perhaps they had similar areas of origin (somewhere close to western Slavic tribes) but moved northeastward as 2 different waves and are very distinctive archaeologically.

The "traditional" East Slavic subgroup after subtraction of Krivichian and Novgorod Slovenes includes rather homogeneous post-Dulebic nucleus plus White Croats (belong to West Balkan branch ?) and Tivertsy+Ulichi which seem to be of a special origin (perhaps descendants of Ants ?).

Maybe one should distinguish the Dulebic subgroup to avoid a wrong association with the "traditional" East Slavic subgroup.

Alexander

----- Original Message -----

From: Piotr Gasiorowski

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 12:23 AM

Subject: Re: [tied] for ignorants

Yes, it's basically correct, though in fact the picture is even more complex, since initial splits were followed by periods of areal convergence, obscuring the structure of the Stammbaum (which was not very distinct anyway). Sergei will probably join the discussion, so here's an initial taxonomic proposal:

1. Krivichian (archaic northeastern dialects, now absorbed into East Slavic);

2. Lekhitic (Polish, Polabian, Kashubian, extinct Pomeranian dialects);

3. Sorbian (close Lekhitic affinities, partial convergence with Czech);

4. Czech and Slovak (West Balkan affinities, convergence with Lekhitic);

5. West Balkan (Serbian, Croatian, Slovene);

6. East Balkan (OCS, Bulgarian, Macedonian);

7. East Slavic (Russian, Belarusian, Ukrainian).

As you say, 4. and 5. were pretty close in the genetic sense but their geographical separation in the 10th century made them gravitate into the "West Slavic" and "South Slavic" convergence areas, respectively.

Piotr

----- Original Message -----
From: Alexander Stolbov

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 8:11 PM

Subject: Re: [tied] for ignorants

If so we should deny modern classification of the Slavic group languages (Western, Southern and Eastern subgroups) as basing not on genetic (in linguistic sense) but rather on geographic principles.

It seems that there should be at least 5 Slavic subgroups:

1. Northern (Polish and related dialects);

2. Czech-Slovak (+ languages of Slavs between Oder and Elbe ?);

3. West Balkan (Slovene, Serbian, Croatian);

4. East Balkan (Bulgarian, Macedonian)

5. Eastern (Byelorussian etc. - until we consider this subgroup attentively).

Subgroups 2. and 3. should be closer genetically to each other than 1. and 2. or 3. and 4.

Is it so?

Alexander

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.