--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:
>
> Can you explain your ideas on Illyrian?
> Was it closely related to Dacian &/or Thracian?
> Or is enough known to tell?
> Do you see Dacian and Thracian as very close or not?
> What is the consensus on Macedonian? Closer to Greek?
> or to Illyrian? or Thracian/Dacian?
************
My view about Illyrian was firstly based on Cimochowski's and this
issue was thoroughly discussed on Cybalist. So, I think that Illyrian,
like Albanian, was satem language with centum characteristics: same
treatment of palatals before liquids and nasals and before *u/*i >
s/z, same outcomes of long and short voweles: *o > a, *o: > e, *a > a,
*a: > o etc.
If Thracian is fully satem language without any centum
characteristics, I think that they are related just on this aspect,
but otherwise not, even according to Paliga we could talk about
Illyro-Thracian branch.
Due to many Albanian-Romanian isoglosses, that predate Greek and Latin
loans in Albanian, I think that Dacian was Illyrian dialect, till
Macedonian was partly or fully Helenized.
Konushevci