From: alex
Message: 49147
Date: 2007-06-25
>if Dacian was an Illyrian dialect, then there is a big wonder why
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com <mailto:cybalist%40yahoogroups.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