From: Torsten
Message: 65979
Date: 2010-03-16
> --- On Sat, 3/13/10, Torsten <tgpedersen@...> wrote:I better repeat this: The split from Proto-Balto-Slavic is not into Baltic and Slavic, but into West Baltic, East Baltic and Slavic. Now on to your question.
> --- In cybalist@... s.com, george knysh <gknysh@> wrote:
> > --- On Fri, 3/12/10, Torsten <tgpedersen@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > There's another argument: these features are unique to Balto-
> > Slavic within IE and to Baltic Finnic within Uralic (IIRC). On
> > the basis of that, you'd assign it a common substrate.
>
> >
> > GK: Common to BS and BF? Hence the title of the thread should
> > be changed to "X substrate in Finnic and Slavic?!" ?
>
> I keep on vacillating between those two options (which, typically,
> I've opted for since no one else does). From the perspective of
> your own model of the genesis of the Slavic language family,
> perhaps you should ask yourself whether some of the splinter groups
> you see as having made up the Kiev culture were originally Finnic-
> speaking?
>
> ****GK: (1) that would be too late. The Kyiv culture begins to form
> in the second century CE and is full blown by 200 CE. According to
> your perspective it is its Baltic groups which would have been the
> carriers of "substrate X".
> (2) BS means an early linguistic grouping whence developed both B
> and S, with B retaining more of the old BS than S (where more
> innovations). So the absorption of "substrate X" would have occured
> much earlier than the emergence of the Kyiv culture. This substrate
> would have been assimilated by BS and by BF coming from different
> directions.
> Whom do you include among the BF? *****http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic-Finnic_languages