Re: [tied] All of creation in Six and Seven

17-11-03 20:36, alex wrote:

> Yes it confirms trough analogyies, change of declinations & all such
> kind of explanations we know.
> I have the feeling you see the Rom. having other Lautgesetze before
> Roman conquest and other Lautgesetze after Roman conquest.

There was no Balkan Latin and (a fortiori) no Romanian prior to the
Roman conquest. Of course the changes in Latin before it came to be
spoken in the Balkans and the later changes in Balkan Latin were not the
same. Every period had its own changes.

> You can be
> right, but you can be wrong too. Think at the words which presents
> archaical forms comparative with Albanians and their evolution from PIE
> to the actualy form ; I am afraid you avoid to give a "just for fun"
> answer here:-)

Some words in Romanian come from the non-Latin substrate virtually
indistinguishable from Proto-Albanian. They stand apart precisely
because they are not Latin (as opposed to the bulk of Romanian
vocabulary). Of course they are more archaic than Modern Albanian
because they were absorbed from an older stage of Albanian. This doesn't
mean that Romanian itself derives from that substratal language, or that
your "Thracian space" fantasy makes any sense.

Piotr