[tied] Re: Hamp on Alb.

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:

>
> On 2006-07-07 14:49, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> > Language is generally insuffiently expressive compared to a

suitably

> > powerful symbolic language (and bla-bla). I meant that the

language

> > you intended would have been LBK in the outside world, not in

your

> > mind (and said language might have left traces in Balkan

languages,

> > whichever they were). I know you have reserved LBK as the PIE ur-
> > culture.
>
> Leaving bla-bla on the side,

For the record, the "bla-bla" was an auto-comment

>the

immediate

> source of the Albanian word can't be too old; otherwise the
> cluster *-sk- would have become -h- /x/ rather than -shk-. LBK
> flourished ca. 5600-4500 BC -- that's way too early to be of any
> relevance. The donor language was most likely the same from which
> Greek took <baskios> and a couple of related terms. The root is
> also well attested in Celtic (hence the Eng. loanword basket).
>

LBK-Rössen, then. As I read Wikipedia and what else I can lay hands
on, there was continuity there until the Kurgan invasions and the
languages may have been continous over time. Your "donor language"
could be related (or should I say, the "transitive closure" of the
relation "donor language", the terminology of coppice economy would
have tended to follow the items).


Torsten