Re: [tied] Re: Dacian

--- alex_lycos <altamix@...> wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Piotr Gasiorowski"
> <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
>
> > Hamp's bottom line is:
> >
> > "Clearly, the whole question remains completely
> open. But perhaps we
> have been able to clear a little ground."
> >
> > Piotr
>
>
> I stil fail to see which are at last the linguistic
> reasons for making
> Albanian the directly descendant of Dacian. That
> should be the first
> point. The second point is a comedy piece in my
> eyes.
> There are Romanians in the place of ancient Dacians
> ( or a tribe of it).
> There are the Albanians in the places of ancient
> Illyrians ( or a tribe
> of it). Now, some scholars move the Dacians in the
> place of Illyrians
> so, the Albanians should be the Dacians, and they
> move the Illyrians in
> the place of Dacians for having the Romanians. I
> agree, is very easy to
> move them with the pencil on the map, hardly to put
> them in the reality.
> For these which are sympathetic with such idea, I
> will like to take a
> look at this:
>
> -there is Rom. Name Dr�stor for ancient Durostorum ,
> called by Slavs
> "Silistra"

*****GK: Also (earlier) Drister, Derester, Durostol'
in various mediaeval manuscripts.*****

> -there is the Rom. toponyms and names with Preda,
> ancient tribe of
> Dacian Predavenses

*****GK: What you need to demonstrate is the
preponderance of Geto-Thracian hydronyms and toponyms
in Romania+Moldavia if you wish to argue continuity,
You've never been able to do this.****

>etc. etc. etc.
> Show him where he is wrong:-)

*****GK: You've been arguing your point for well over
a year. I'm not sure how many (if any)of your examples
have been accepted as correct. It seems to me that the
overwhelming majority of your arguments have been
thoroughly refuted.******


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com