Re: az+

George,

> Try to write Proto-Bulgarians or Bulg(h)ars whenever referring
> to the old population that migrated from the steppes. Otherwise...
> confusion.

My mistake.

>
> >So the question would be not how to explain everything through
> >Slavic, but how to say which is what.
>
> Nor everything through Iranic: the "substrate" is there, too --
> Thracian, Dacian and even Illyrian (incidentally, these also of the
> "satem" kind).

I never said only Iranian. My usual question is: why not also Iranian?

>
> >As a would-be linguist you would benefit more from trying to
> > > understand such things
> >
> >It is not a particularly big deal to understand such things. Many
> >people learn them by heart without any understanding.
>
> That's... (religious) worshipping, not science...

No it is my observation on people teaching history of Slavic languages
without speaking a single one of them. Has nothing in particular to
do with people on this list.

Eva