Re: [tied] Veneti

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Howey" <andyandmae_howey@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Veneti



> Hello, Piotr, et al:
> There are many, many claims on the web that say Albanian is a direct descendant ot Illyrian. All you need to do is do a google search against "albanian illyrian languange" and you will get in excess of 1300 hits. When Cyril, our beloved list leader, WAS maintaining his web site, even he had at least one article about this. What is the general concensus among qualified linguists regarding this claim?

Quite simply, there's no consensus at all. The theory that Albanian descended directly from Illyrian is popular, partly because it's an old idea, suported by many Albanologists in the past, and partly because it enjoys semi-official support in Albania (autochthonist theories are always politically attractive). It's difficult to falsify, since we know next to nothing about Illyrian, and therefore "Illyrian" can mean different things to different people. Some linguists still believe in the Illyrian theory, others try to connect Albanian with Dacian and/or Thracian, others, including Eric Hamp, prefer to remain agnostic and not to lump Albanian with anything. My impression, based, admittedly, on very scarce data, is that Illyrian was not a Satem language, and if Messapic, of which we know something, was indeed a variety of Illyrian, it could hardly have had anything to do with Albanian. Of all the possibilities, I'm most sympathetic to the theory that Albanian is most closely related to Dacian.

Piotr