>the problem is somewhere else george. The problem is just the[Indeed, "spoked" is a linguistic problem. ;-) (Fara d! speak,
>linguistic aspect, the other aspects are clear enough.
>-there have been thracians, none known which a language
>They became romanised .The primeval proto-Romanian population wasn't made
>That does not mean they have took[alt verb neregulat: take, took, taken]
>- all this happens in 400 years.By the way: what's your opinion on the Romanization
>forget its language, take an another, the LatinThey were on the verge to forget this one, too,
>Niente, nix, null komma nix. I say " no trace"This is as wrong and false as the opposite extreme,
>because the names , toponyms, etc are notNot because of that, but because of some... professionalism
>considerated as having too much to say.
>Even if the valahians lived South of Danube, how doesThere are a few words that Northern Romanians have lost
>it come there is nothing more in their latin as the very
>simple terms of life?
>the corpus of Greek literature... or to this one. :-)
>big amount of lexical identities of Latin & Greek ,Well, some resemblance must be there: they're a li'l
>the linguists will have said the Greek language belongsOh! :-)
>too to the Eastern Romance