Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
> Albanian certainly has northerly affinities (as noted also by Eric
> Hamp, another eminent student of the language), but there is no
> particularly close relationship to Baltic. I take Albanian/Dacian to
> be one of the Satem groups more or less coordinate with Balto-Slavic,
> Indo-Iranian, Armenian and Thracian
>
> Piotr
I could find on the net just an article called The Position of Albanian
Eric P. Hamp, University og Chigaco.
Interesting enough, from all words we know the meaning from Thracian
language there is almost nothing discussed. Apparently the authors
connect the words with unknown meaning just on the basis of their
phonetically appearance with some other languages as Baltic.(I include
Dacian in the terminology "Thracian language" since the speculation of
Georgiev about Dacian being a different language as Thracian is wrong
even for a blind fish)
It appears very suspect for instance that Duridanov modify an wrong
written Dacian gloss "skaugdae" (= skaugetae), he put an "d" there for
making an "skau(d)gedas thus connecting it with Baltic Skawd-gedas.
In the same manner one will put an "r" there and we will have the form
*skaurgedae analysing it as scourge= to flow and dae= the iranian
"daoi".
I am sorry but this is a very curious thing to make such connections
with words we do not know what they mean. It looks as making first a
theory and then trying to put these words ( even if modifying them)
inside of this theory. Is this an accurate way to work? I guess, it is
not.
This is why I cannot put the Duridanov and Georgien to the level of
Dimitri Detschev. It has something to do with the quality of the work.
You got me curious about Hamp . I should like to read more of him for
building myself an idea..