First, a question of terminology. I do not
use the terms "Illyrian", "Thracian" and "Getic/Dacian" interchangeably. Nor do
I accept arbitrary groupings like "Thraco-Illyrian", "Thraco-Phrygian" or
"Thraco-Armenian", which assume unproven connections.
The Illyrian languages are mostly
undocumented -- except for onomastic material, which provides supportive
evidence for the ancient tradition that Messapic (and some other IE
dialects of ancient Apulia) came from across the Adriatic; Messapic is known
from numerous (if mostly brief) inscriptions and gives us some idea of what the
Illyrian languages looked like: centum, and apparently related more closely
to Italic, Venetic and Celtic than to Hellenic. Their historical range
included Dalmatia, Pannonia, and originally perhaps some areas further north (as
far as Silesia, judging from hydronymic evidence).
Thracian and Getic were both Satem
languages (like Albanian), but even the fragmentary material at our disposal
shows that they differed in too many respects to be classified as
variants of the same language or even as closely related languages. Judging from
characteristic phonological innovations, Albanian is probably closer to Getic
than to anything else. I suppose "Getic" would be an acceptable name for a
branch of IE including Albanian as well as Dacian, Moesian, and the
hypothetically related languages of the Carpi, Costoboci, etc., used on the
Lower Danube and in the Carpathian region (extending into Moldova
and western Ukraine).
There are some Getic-looking (not Thracian
or Illyrian) names in the northern ranges of the Carpathians.
<Beskidy> may indeed be one of them, and I'd certainly adduce
<Tatry> (the highest range of the Carpathians, along the border
between Poland and Slovakia). Remnants of a Getic-speaking population may have
survived in the mountains of Slovakia (despite the Celtic and Germanic
penetration of the area) long enough to transmit such names to the Slavs
directly rather than via Germanic (no shifted consonants).
I wish we knew the Getic form of "eleven"
(in fact, any Getic word with a securely established meaning would be a
priceless gem). As we don't know it, however, the simplest and least speculative
hypothesis about the source of the "N-on-ten" construction in the Balkan League
need not assume local substrate influence. The construction existed in Slavic
before the Slavic expansion began, so why agree that the Bulgarians and
Macedonians brought it from the north but insist that the Romanians
borrowed it from Dacian or Thracian? It's more reasonable to draw conclusions
from the data we have, rather than assume something we'll never be able to
prove or disprove.
Piotr
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 1:14 PM
Subject: [tied] Re: Daci
Back in the times where Albanian was considered to be a
descendant of
Illyrian, various toponyms outside present Albania but
cognates in
Albanian were considered to be "North Illyrian". But let them be
Thracian; suits me fine.
Of the two I remember one was Bucharest
(Albanian
<bukure> "beautiful"), the other was Beskidy (and I hope I
spelled
them right), a mountain range in Southern Poland (?).
Now if the
latter is indeed Thracian/North Illyrian, we have a
Thracian toponym close
(well, closer) to the Slavic Urheimat, and who
is to say whether two
languages in this geographical proximity did
not both have the "one-on-ten"
construction?