Re: [tied] Veneti -Ligurian-Messapic-Illyrian-Lusitanian

It seems to be a Kentum Southern European branch of IE, including Illyrian,
Messapic, Ligurian and Lusitanian. This idea is sugested by many authors,
and an alternative view is that they were isolated languages retaining some
common traits, but no close relatives. This group of languages had an area
including Albania, Yugoslavia, Northern Italy, Southern France and Northern
Iberia. The later spread of Italiotes and Celts superseeded these people.

Joao SL

----- Original Message -----
From: Piotr Gasiorowski <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 10:00 AM
Subject: 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 re
> lated to Dacian.
>
> Piotr
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>