Re: Vilga

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:

>
> Aigius wrote:
>
> > Lithuanian VIL~KO > VOL~KO > VO~LO~KO > Russian VO~LOK, like:
> > Latvian ZEL~TAS > Russian ZO~LO~TO
> > Latvian ZEL~TAS > Polish ZLA~TO
> > Lithunian KAR~VE > Russian KO~RO~VA
> > Lithuanian KAR~VE > Polish KRA~VA
> > Lithuanian GAR~DAS > Russian GO~ROD
> > Lithuanian GAR~DAS > Polish GRAD...
>
> None of these Polish forms is correct (they should be <zl/oto,

krowa,

> gród>. Yes, we all know that Baltic and Slavic are closely

related, but

> your arrow suggests that the Slavic forms are descended from the
> Lithuanian ones, which they are not. They merely come from a

common

> (Proto-Balto-Slavic) source.

I wanted to show that diphthongs are common in Baltic and
uncommon in Slavic. So, it is more possible
VIL~KAS > VOLK, or VIL~KO > VOL~KO > VOLK than VO~LOK > VOLK .

Regards, Aigius