>but whoever the guy might be, his book (of course aimed at
>demolishing
>any Romanian "continuity" theory) is by no means a petty propaganda
>concoction. It is the work of someone who's an expert. (AFAI can
>remember,
I completly read his book and the book is only a poor compilation
from different authors written compiled only to sustain a Hungarian
political purpose: 'The Romanians arrive in Transylvania in sec.
XIV.' (as an example: I bet that the guy cannot tell you correctly 10
Albanian words viewing some of his examples (or as Regarding some
Albanian-Romanian phonetic correspondances and their possible
timeframes : this is an 'empty subject' for him; so is faraway to be
an expert as you told us) . On the other hand he spoke in detail
about Romanian-Albanian Connections and fix in his book the main
timeframe of this connection even long after Slavs arrival in Balkans
in order to sustain his 'thesis' and to arrive to 'a later migration
date')
So I cannot understand how you can qualify Dunai as 'an expert'.
If this Dunai is 'an expert' what Rosetti (and his ILR) is
supposed to be, in this case?
Only the Best,
Marius