---
mkapovic@... wrote:
(GK) I'd be curious to know
> your
> > take on the emergence of "Slavic" (not
> "Balto-Slavic"
> > or "pre-Slavic"). Is there any linguistic evidence
> > which can help to date its dissociation from
> > "Balto-Slavic" or development from
> "pre-Slavic"?
>
> I don't think so.
*****GK: So linguists who are aware of the multiple
innovations from "Balto-Slavic" which produced Slavic
cannot associate ANY of these innovations with a
particular time or circumstance? Out of curiosity:
what about the "god" word? The old IE (and presumably
"BaltoSlavic") concept of this, still present in
Baltic, has been changed in Slavic to a word linked to
a very specific deity, a relatively minor god of
wealth. I wonder if this might not be the result of
Scythian influence (the way of life of their
gold-hungry aristocracies)? ******
Anyway, I'm pretty close to those
> who think that
> Proto-Slavic was just an innovative Baltic dialect
*****GK: As long as you do not reify "Baltic" as a
previous poster did with "Greek"...*****
> that has rapidly
> expanded over a vast territory due to some
> historical reasons.
*****GK: Here we are in a better situation than in the
matter of earlier origins.******
I certainly
> don't think that Slavs were some separate nation or
> something like that if
> that's what you mean.
******GK: I agree. They were certainly a distinct
"group" (as were the Baltic tribes), but hardly a
unified "nation" (neither were the Greeks of course
until relatively recently).******
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com