Re: [tied] Re: the slavic influence in Balcans

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
An: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Gesendet: Freitag, 2. August 2002 12:58
Betreff: [tied] Re: the slavic influence in Balcans

> --- In cybalist@..., Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Aug 2002 14:32:05 +0200, alexmoeller@... wrote:
>
> > No. That Romanian and Albanian have retained the words in their
> > original (Proto-Slavic) shape, while they have been altered in
> > (South-)Slavic itself is not an argument at all for them being loans
> > from some Balkanic source into Slavic. That's as absurd as claiming
> > that "Caesar" must be a borrowing from Germanic into Latin, because
> > all the Romance languages have undergone the change kai- > ke- > ce-
> > (and Germanic hasn't).
> >
> >
> > =======================
> > Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> > mcv@...
>
> I've seen someone somewhere relating the "conservativeness" of
> various Romance laguages to the time of the conquest of the province
> in question. The only Romance language to keep /ke/ is Sardic.
> Sardinia was conquered by the Romans in the 3rd century BCE as one of
> their first provinces. So why Germanic "kaiser"? The alternative
> solution is to assume that /ke/ -> /c^e/ spread geographically in the
> Roman empire, but why should Sardinia be isolated from that?
>
> Torsten
>

[Moeller] the usual explanation here is the geographical position . It
is generally admited that the populations from the extremity of the
empire could not get anymore the "inovations" from the center (Rom in
this case), so they kept the old way to speak. Personally, I am not so
happy with this explanation and I assume a big influence of the
substrate and of the articulatory system of each population have had a
big influence on the acutaly way to speak of the "romance" folks.

regards

a. moeller