Re: [tied] Re: illyrian lexicon or inventory

15-11-03 13:41, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:

> Well, I don't believe in the Daco-Roman continuity story,

I don't believe in Daco-Roman continuity in _Dacia_, but given that the
evacuation of Roman Dacia involved the large-scale resettlement of the
local population to the areas south of the Danube, it's still possible
that Proto-Albanian, the Romanian substrate and Dacian are roughly the
same thing. Thracian, at any rate, doesn't seem to be a close relative
of Albanian (cf. the completely different developments of, say, *k^w >
Thracian <sb>, pre- and Proto-Albanian *tsw > *c^ > Alb. s), and a
connection between Illyrian and Albanian would only be possible at all
if Messapic wasn't a form of Illyrian.

> and I think that
> Romanian (i.e. the Romance dialect cluster including Daco-Romanian,
> Istro-Romanian, Megleno-Romanian and Aromanian) developed South of the
> Danube, i.e. somewhere either in Illyria or in Thracia. The fact that
> Romanian is a Romance language, and that it shares a substrate with
> Albanian, both point to Illyria rather than Thrace (Thrace, if I'm not
> mistaken, belongs rather within the Greek half of the Empire). The
> Bulgarian, rather than Serbian, Slavic adstrate may represent a secondary
> spread into Thrace (from Macedonia), and then to North of the Danube.

I'd put my money on the inland parts of the Balkans, approximately an
area overlapping Kosovo, western Bulgaria and Macedonia, as the
"homeland" of both Romanian and Albanian.

Piotr