Etruscans=Illyrians=Pelasgi //// tuscans=albanians ?????

Status
Not open for further replies.
What is the difference between P-illyrian and Q-illyrian languages. All I can find is that the q-illyrian was in the north while P-illyrian was from montenegro and heading south.

has P-illyrian got greek influence? or doric or ??

the difference you make is correct, ancients Greeks call Illyrians only those south of Montenegro,
also in pliny or livy we find that,

even genetical are different populations,

for many damatians etc were not Illyrians but Illyricum,
by following Greek they were Keltoi and relative to Keltoi
non Thracian but connected to Thracian some tribes,

the difference of Q-illyrian and P-illyrian is forst time heard,
 
You are the first person to ever claim such a distinction. What evidence do you have that such a distinction can be even made from the scarce corpus of Illyrian?

I cannot link for some reason, But I found this below, then I searched the net and found a book called - The celtic Encyclopedia , Volume 1 by Harry Mountain. This ALSO spoke of the P and Q illyrian

Like Pokorny and Hubschmid, I had blithely assumed that the attested Venetic language
of the Po Valley belonged with Illyrian in a "Veneto-Illyrian"
branch of Indo-European. Careful examination of the Venetic corpus
has now shown me that Venetic cannot be shoehorned into the same IE
branch as Illyrian. However, the affinities between Lusitanian and
Messapic are too striking to ignore, and the connections between
Messapic itself and the poorly known languages of Illyria proper are
clear. Therefore I must postulate an Illyro-Lusitanian branch of IE
which excludes Venetic, as explained below.

The principal Illyro-Lusitanian diagnostics are gemination of
postvocalic consonants followed by semivowels, accent generally
recessive but falling on the last syllable of the first part of a
compound noun, and monophthongization of long diphthongs. Within
this branch of Indo-European, Lusitanian retains inherited /o/ and
final /m/, while the Illyrian group changes them to /a/ and /n/.
The latter group includes Q-languages and P-languages based on the
treatment of labiovelars. Messapic and Japygian are Q-Illyrian
languages, while Macedonian in my view is a P-Illyrian language.
All these languages have merged the inherited voiced aspirates with
the simple voiced stops, and each shows some idiosyncratic secondary
developments with its consonants.

M. Durante, in "Il nome di Pesaro e l'accento iniziale in Illirico"
(AION-L 1:35-45, 1959), reconstructs a South Illyrian *luk{w}o-
'wolf' on the basis of the Paeonian (i.e. North Macedonian)
personal names <Lukkeios> and <Luppeios>, which he contrasts with
Proto-Albanian *ulk{w}o- (Alb. <ujk> 'wolf'). He regards the
etymology of the Paeonian names as certain, on the grounds that
<Lupus> and <Lupa> are common personal names in Latin inscriptions
of the Balkan peninsula, and a labiovelar can go either way. I
note, however, that a simple labiovelar would normally have
produced -k- or -p-, if not retained as -k{w}-. The (South)
Illyrian for 'wolf' must have been *lukk{w}o-, with the gemination
occurring either in Illyrian or in its parent Indo-European
language, since the PIE form itself is reconstructed as *wl.kwo-. A
similar gemination occurred independently in some Italian and
insular dialects of Late Latin. Probus prescribes "aqua non acqua",
and the futility of his prescriptivism is shown by Modern Italian
<acqua>, <acquidotto>, etc. We also have Logudorese <abba>, with
Nuorese <abbatiza> and Log. <abbaduza> from Lat. <aquatilia>, Log.
<abbagotta> 'glue' i.e. 'aqua cocta', Corsican <strakkwu> 'stranded
goods' i.e. '(bona) extra aquam', Log. <abbardzu>, Sicilian
<akkwaloru>, and Apulian <akkwara> from Lat. <aqua:rium>, <-a>, and
Sic. <akkwattsu> from Lat. <aqua:tio:> (REW 570-588).

Attic Greek <híppos> 'horse' can be regarded as an inherited reflex
of PIE *H1ek^wo- only through strained ad-hoc assumptions. It forms
both first and second elements of compound personal names. In
Macedonian, <-ippos> occurs as a second element; <Bílippos> is
Hellenized as <Phílippos>. In Epidaurian and Tarentine Greek proper
names, <-ikkos> is found. As with the Paeonian names, it is evident
that we are dealing with Q-Illyrian and P-Illyrian material. Since
Illyrian is a centum group (pace Hamp et al.), it makes no
distinction between inherited */k/ and */k^/, and reflects */k^w/
the same as */kw/, producing a geminate in intervocalic position. P-
Illyrian has /pp/, and Q-Illyrian including the Japygian extension
into Italy (with Messapic) has /kk/, Tarentine having borrowed <-
ikkos> from Messapic. Mycenaean Greek has no compound personal
names formed from 'horse', indicating this word's novelty, and the
attested forms, nom. sg. <i-qo> and gen. sg. <i-qo-jo>, show that a
labiovelar was still in use (/(h)ikk{w}os/, /(h)ikk{w}oyo/, cf. Epic
Grk. gen. <híppoio>) in the Illyrian dialect from which Mycenaean
borrowed. I see no reason to suppose that Attic-Epic <híppos>
continues the Mycenaean form, with */kk{w}/ developing into /pp/ in
Proto-Attic. More likely the Attic form is borrowed directly from
Macedonian or other P-Illyrian. The inherited Greek root likely
appears in <Epeiós> (builder of the Trojan Horse, Il. 23:665, Od.
8:493, etc.) from an extinct *epos 'horse'.

Labiovelars in word-initial position or preceded by other consonants
evidently did not undergo gemination. J. Whatmough (_Prae-Italic
Dialects_ v. 2, p. 606, 1933) regards the Messapic onomastic forms
<Penkeos> and <Penkaheh[e]> as derived from *penkwe 'five' (the
forms are genn. sgg. of an /e:w/-stem and an /ayo/-stem). Latin
<gurdus> can be explained as a loan from Lusitanian, reflecting
*gwr.H-do- (see Cyb. #59524).

J.U. Hubschmied (Vox Rom. 1:102-3) refers Lower Engadine
<gioc> 'juniper' to an Illyrian *yukk{w}o-. A protoform *yuppo- is
required by Old Upper Engadine <giop> 'id.' (see J. Hubschmid,
_Praeromanica_, p.32, 1949). Both these and some awkwardly related
words for 'juniper' in other languages can be explained if we
postulate a Western IE *yukw- which was extended in Celtic as *yuk{w}
i-, in Illyro-Lusitanian as *yukk{w}o- yielding Q-Ill. *yukko- and P-
Ill. *yuppo-, both represented in the Illyrian substrate of the East
Alps. Ligurian <jupikellos> (Diosc.) must have its first element
borrowed from Gaulish *yupi-, and the modern Alpine toponym
<Giubiasco> likewise has a Ligurian suffix on a Gaulish base, since
Ligurian did not labialize inherited */kw/. Latin <ju:niperus>, <-
i:> (f.) has evidently been altered to conform to other tree-names
from *ju:nipera 'juniper-berry-producing', from *ju:num 'juniper-
berry', from Old Lat. *juxnom < *yukw-snom.

Despite its retention of inherited /o/ and final /m/, Lusitanian
shows striking affinities to Messapic. In the inscription of Cabeço
das Fráguas, <Iccona> appears to be the name of the goddess
equivalent to the Gaulish Epona, in the dative case. Thus
Lusitanian has *ikko- from PIE *H1ek^wo- 'horse', just as Messapic
and other Q-Illyrian have *(h)ikko-. If we assume that PIE *H1e-
was reflected in Illyro-Lusitanian as *hi-, we can explain not
only 'horse' but several other words in Messapic and Lusitanian.
Mess. <hipades> is equivalent in sense to Grk. <epéthe:ke> 'placed'
(something) 'upon' (someone), in practice 'dedicated'
(something) 'to' (a deity). Mess. <hipa-> corresponds to Grk. <epi-
> if both reflect *H1ep- with different grades and extensions, <hipa-
> reflecting *H1epo- and <epi-> *H1pi-. The simple Mess. aorist
<des> 'placed', presumably /de:s/, lacks the Greek augment and
kappatic extension of <éthe:ke>, corresponding instead in form to
Epic <bê> 'went' (with augment <ébe:>), where Greek has lost the
3sg. secondary ending -t, and Messapic has apparently substituted
the primary ending -ti with assibilation to -s (for this subst. cf.
Lat. <fe:cit>, <siet> (Cato), Old Lat. <fe:ced>, <sied> with sec. -
d). Loss of initial /h/ in Lusitanian is trivial, and <ipadem> (my
correction for the v.l. <ifadem> which makes no principled sense)
can be understood as the 1sg. of the same verb, 'I dedicated' (see
my analysis of the CdF insc. in Cyb. #58889). Lus.
<indi> 'thereupon, and then' in my view represents Ill.-Lus. *hindi
from PIE *H1en-dhi, cognate with Lat. <inde>. Messapic also
has /a:/-stem datives in <-a> (presumably /-a:/ from */-a:i/, cf.
Whatmough, op. cit. p. 600), e.g. <Aprodita> in several dedicatory
inscriptions. Furthermore, Messapic regularly produces a geminate
when a consonant is followed by the palatal approximant [y] plus a
vowel; thus Mess. <Orra> on coins, Lat. <Uria>, Grk. <Ouría>, and
various gentilicia in -CCes from *-Cyos, e.g. <Platorres> nom. sg.
from *Platorios, <Blatthes> from *Blatios (Whatmough, op. cit., p.
603). In the CdF text we have <loiminna> following <Iccona>,
evidently an adjective in the fem. dat. sg. agreeing with it, very
plausibly from *loiminya:i, and <labbo> (the v.l. <laebo> is
unlikely since the following word is spelled <comaiam>) can be
understood as a neut. dat. sg. with instrumental force, earlier
*labyo:i.

I take the Lus. forms in -ai, -oi from the text of Lamas de Moledo
as nomm. pll. with short diphthongs, not datt. sgg. with long ones.

Lusitanian generalizes /o/ as the connecting vowel of compounds as
we see in <Trebopala> dat. sg. 'to the Protector of the Village' vel
sim. and *Toutopalanta:ikos 'of the People of the Palanta (river)'
extracted from Latinized Celtiberian <Toudopalandaigae> dat. sg.
(see Cyb. #58889); this vowel is apparently elided in the dat. sg.
<Trebarune>. Latin <andabata> 'gladiator who fought with an eyeless
helmet' has been etymologized as borrowed from a Gaulish compound
*andobatta 'blind beater' but the alteration is unexplained. More
likely this word is from Messapic with secondary /a/ as the
connecting vowel. The word could have reached Latin through Old
Oscan, before the assimilation of -nd- to -nn- occurred in Oscan.
Gladiatorial games came to the Romans from the Samnites.

Illyrian accent is inferred primarily from place-names and river-
names whose modern forms require an ancient accent more recessive
than that of the Latin penultimate law. In Illyria proper, Albanian
<Durrës> reflects <Dýrrachium> (although Italian <Durázzo> and
Serbian <Drac^> require a normalized <Dyrráchium>), <Drisht(i)>
reflects <Drívastum>, and <Ishm> reflects <Ísamnus>. In Messapia,
<Bríndisi> requires <Brúndisium>, <Bréntesion>, or the like (several
ancient forms occur, but the native name must have had initial
accent). In Picenum, <Pésaro> requires <Písaurum>. Durante (op.
cit.) argues that the correct name of the river upon which Pesaro
sits (now the Foglia) was <Ísaurus>, with <Písaurum> a prepositional
compound using the zero-grade *H1pi-, Ill. *pi-. He cites
<Parupion> (Geog. Rav.) and <Pasinum> (Plin.) as parallel examples,
invoking elision of *pi- to *p'-, but the Ill. combining form 'upon-
, on-' could just as well have been *p- from the unextended zero-
grade *H1p-. <Terni>, <Téramo>, and <Térmoli> require <Intéramn(i)
a>, showing that Illyrian accent was not strictly word-initial, but
immediately preceded the second element of nominal compounds. The
actual Ill. form was likely *Antérapna from *n.ter-ap-na: '(town)
between waters', the /in/ and /mn/ being Latinizations.

Turning now to Venetic we find that inherited long diphthongs are
preserved as diphthongs in dat. sg. endings, e.g. <Vhrutana.i.> 'to
Frutana', <Gra.i.ko.i.> 'to Graikos'. Inherited */kw/ remains as
such in <-kve> 'and'. Forms like <Vhugia> and <Re.i.tiia.i.> show
no evidence of /y/-induced gemination. Intervocalic */bh/ becomes -
b-, but initial */bh/ becomes f- (usually written <vh>) as in
Latin. (Indeed, Venetic treatment of voiced aspirates is so similar
to that of Latin, which is peculiar within Italic, that I am tempted
to posit a Venetic substrate for Latin. This is supported by the
names <Praeneste> and <Venetulani> (Plin.) as well as the use
of 'free ones' in the sense 'children' (Lat. <li:beri:>, Ven. dat.
pl. <louderobos>). But I digress.) The accent of <Triéste>
requires ancient <Tergéste>, and <Odérzo> requires <Opitérgium>, in
contrast to the accent of the Illyrian type (*Térgeste,
*Opítergium). Both of these are native Venetic formations based on
*terg- 'marketplace', which has been borrowed into South Slavic
(Serbian <trg> 'town square'). In Venetic inscriptions, the noun
usually written <ekupetaris> (once <ekvopetars>) 'funerary monument,
commemorative gift, memorial' vel sim. has a syncopated form <ep(p)
etaris>, indicating a secondary accent on the first, not last
syllable of the first element of a compound in Venetic. Thus
Venetic has too many differences from Illyro-Lusitanian languages to
be included in the group. Now, while Venetian <Trevíso> points to
<Tarvísium>, Friulian <Tárvis> requires <Tárvisium>. Since this is
formed like <Brúndisium>, it appears to be an Illyrian toponym whose
accent was preserved in the East Alps, but not by the Veneti who
settled on the plain later. Another indication of the priority of
Illyrian here is the river-name <Plavis>, now <Piave>. Venetic
maintains inherited /o/ and the river would have been *Plovis (from
the /o/-grade of *pleu-) if the Veneti had named it.

Latin <accipenser> 'sturgeon' (which has several variants) can be
understood with some difficulty as an indirect loan from Illyrian
through Venetic. Venetian-Paduan-Triestine <kópeze> shows that the
original accent was on the second syllable, while Vicentine-Fiuman
<kopéze> reflects a normalized Latin form with penultimate accent.
Meyer-Lübke takes the correct form as <acupe:(n)ser> (REW 129).
However, the Hellenized form <akkipé:sios> indicates that the
geminate was real. The original accent is consistent with an
Illyrian compound; borrowed into Venetic, the word would not have
been recognized as a compound, and antepenultimate accent would have
been acceptable, as in <Tarvísium>. I take the first element as
Ill. *akka 'river' from *akwa:, the second as *penser(i)s vel sim.
of undetermined origin but referring to some large animal, so that
the sturgeon was called 'river-ox' or 'river-beast' or something
similar. We might expect the connecting vowel to be secondary /a/,
since Lusitanian as we have seen generalizes /o/. The Romance forms
however demand *akku-penser(i)s. It appears that in this position
the Japygian dialect at the head of the Adriatic had /u/ before a
labial rather than secondary /a/. If my view of <andabata> is
correct, Messapic had /a/ even before a labial. H. Krahe (IF
58:143) similarly observed that Illyrian names sometimes have /u/
before a labial when secondary /a/ from */o/ is to be expected.

> In developing his theory of Alteuropäisch, Hans Krahe focused too
> much attention on suffixes, too little attention on the relation
> between root-grade and suffix, and far too little attention on the
> semantics of the complete names. His successors have offered some
> partial remediation, but to my knowledge no revision of the theory
> has been published which addresses all the problems. What I
propose
> is, of course, a radical revision. Resulting from the conflation
of
> distinct strata, the Alteuropäisch system as such is a mirage, not
> the product of a uniform Proto-Western IE as Krahe thought, much
less
> of PIE itself as W.P. Schmid insisted.


..........................................
Another site

Despite its retention of inherited /o/ and final /m/, Lusitanian
shows striking affinities to Messapic. In the inscription of Cabeço
das Fráguas, <Iccona> appears to be the name of the goddess
equivalent to the Gaulish Epona, in the dative case. Thus
Lusitanian has *ikko- from PIE *H1ek^wo- 'horse', just as Messapic
and other Q-Illyrian have *(h)ikko-. If we assume that PIE *H1e-
was reflected in Illyro-Lusitanian as *hi-, we can explain not
only 'horse' but several other words in Messapic and Lusitanian.
Mess. <hipades> is equivalent in sense to Grk. <epéthe:ke> 'placed'
(something) 'upon' (someone), in practice 'dedicated'
(something) 'to' (a deity). Mess. <hipa-> corresponds to Grk. <epi-
> if both reflect *H1ep- with different grades and extensions, <hipa-
> reflecting *H1epo- and <epi-> *H1pi-.


I will try to link inforamtion.....eupedia or my search engine might be playing up
 
As an Albanian I must say this thread makes no sense. I'm sorry, but Albanians most probably have nothing in common with Etruscans. We are an isolated case, if I'd had to speculate, I'd say we have more in common with ancient celtic, than with Etruscan (mind that I'm speculating here).

Also do mind, you have to be VERY carefull when using words to find similiarties with other languages. There are dialects in Albanian that have words that can't be found in the standardized Albanian or in the other Albanian dialects. Sometimes the dialects differ so much that for example most Albanians in Macedonia won't understand the southern-albanian dialect known as Tosk. This also counts for dialects inside the albanian spoken in Macedonia and Kosova(known as Geg dialect). Even though they are claimed to be the same dialect there are so large differences that sometimes they can't understand eachother. I'm not talking only about simple words, but where words are placed in the sentence too. This somewhat similar to that of today's Danish and Norwegian. Even though it's easy for a Norwegian to read danish and vice-versa most Norwegians have problems understanding oral danish. Also Albanians in macedonia claim to be descendants from paeonians and others from pelasgians (I'd SPECULATE that most albanians don't know the difference between pelasgians and Paeonians, hence I'd say they are talking about the same thing). This might be a reason on the large dialect difference and usage of words here that don't exist anywhere else in the albanian lands. For example a friend of mine told me that his father told him that his grandfather (long before the communist propaganda and what historians call the Albanian National awakening) had told him again that they were descendants of pelasgians. And I seldom hear the Albanians from Macedonia talking about the Illyrians, they seem more to be attached to the dardanians and Paeonians/pelasgian descendancy. I don't claim that these are facts, but these albanians have not been subjected to any albanian or macedonian propaganda (they were outside the communist regimes reach and are even today very isolated from the Macedonians. I travelled through there and it feels like you are driving through a whole other country than macedonia). I'd say that this information has probably circulated for a long time in these communities orally, and there were ruins I'd never heard of probably due to politics(A cancer on history if you ask me).

Someone has to research the dialects very closely to even start discussing the albanian language as a whole. I don't think anyone has even looked at the albanian talked in Macedonia. There is currently a large debate exactly on this topic about the dialects of Albanian, very similar to the language conflict in Norway in the 19th century. The standardized albanian of today is not a good standard for the spoken albanian today. Why? Because a new book has just been published (few days ago actually) were documents have been researched (some granted by Russia, surprised? not actually since Enver hoxha had strong connections to Moscow at the start of his regime) where it is shown that standard albanian (the one teached in schools) is heavilly skewed towards Tosk-Albanian. Why? because standard albanian was created during the communist regime. Why is this a problem? Even though the idea behind it was good and experts from all the albanian communities tok part, Enver hoxha the dictator changed the original by for example add more words from his dialect, which is Tosk. About 70% of Albanians speak Geg-Albanian and different variation of this.

In short what I'm saying is that you base your discussion on the Albanian language and history on very little information. You go on comparing words and sentences as if albanian only has one dialect. It has infact 4 dialects that can be VERY different from eachother. Also for you interessted in this topic, look out for a large volume on albanian language/history that is to be published by some Austrians (don't remember their names). I'm hoping this will be as objective/neutral as possible.

Also there is no ill intent behind this comment, only to give you some information about the language since this is probably the only forums I've seen where serbs, greek and albanians actually discuss things instead of throwing the F-word at eachother.
 
Also I'd like to add that I might be wrong about the relationship between etruscan and albanian (I am no scientist on language). I guess time will tell.
 
Also I'd like to add that I might be wrong about the relationship between etruscan and albanian (I am no scientist on language). I guess time will tell.

Well, welcome to Eupedia, Devil's Advocate.

First off, I must wholeheartedly agree when you say that this thread makes no sense. If you take a look into the posts I made in this thread, it is very obvious. I must admit that although I'm not an expert on Albanian, I can tell you that the general mainstream scientific consensus is that Albanian is an Indo-European language, whereas Etruscan is a non-Indo-European language.
 
As an Albanian I must say this thread makes no sense. I'm sorry, but Albanians most probably have nothing in common with Etruscans. We are an isolated case, if I'd had to speculate, I'd say we have more in common with ancient celtic, than with Etruscan (mind that I'm speculating here).

Also do mind, you have to be VERY carefull when using words to find similiarties with other languages. There are dialects in Albanian that have words that can't be found in the standardized Albanian or in the other Albanian dialects. Sometimes the dialects differ so much that for example most Albanians in Macedonia won't understand the southern-albanian dialect known as Tosk. This also counts for dialects inside the albanian spoken in Macedonia and Kosova(known as Geg dialect). Even though they are claimed to be the same dialect there are so large differences that sometimes they can't understand eachother. I'm not talking only about simple words, but where words are placed in the sentence too. This somewhat similar to that of today's Danish and Norwegian. Even though it's easy for a Norwegian to read danish and vice-versa most Norwegians have problems understanding oral danish. Also Albanians in macedonia claim to be descendants from paeonians and others from pelasgians (I'd SPECULATE that most albanians don't know the difference between pelasgians and Paeonians, hence I'd say they are talking about the same thing). This might be a reason on the large dialect difference and usage of words here that don't exist anywhere else in the albanian lands. For example a friend of mine told me that his father told him that his grandfather (long before the communist propaganda and what historians call the Albanian National awakening) had told him again that they were descendants of pelasgians. And I seldom hear the Albanians from Macedonia talking about the Illyrians, they seem more to be attached to the dardanians and Paeonians/pelasgian descendancy. I don't claim that these are facts, but these albanians have not been subjected to any albanian or macedonian propaganda (they were outside the communist regimes reach and are even today very isolated from the Macedonians. I travelled through there and it feels like you are driving through a whole other country than macedonia). I'd say that this information has probably circulated for a long time in these communities orally, and there were ruins I'd never heard of probably due to politics(A cancer on history if you ask me).

Someone has to research the dialects very closely to even start discussing the albanian language as a whole. I don't think anyone has even looked at the albanian talked in Macedonia. There is currently a large debate exactly on this topic about the dialects of Albanian, very similar to the language conflict in Norway in the 19th century. The standardized albanian of today is not a good standard for the spoken albanian today. Why? Because a new book has just been published (few days ago actually) were documents have been researched (some granted by Russia, surprised? not actually since Enver hoxha had strong connections to Moscow at the start of his regime) where it is shown that standard albanian (the one teached in schools) is heavilly skewed towards Tosk-Albanian. Why? because standard albanian was created during the communist regime. Why is this a problem? Even though the idea behind it was good and experts from all the albanian communities tok part, Enver hoxha the dictator changed the original by for example add more words from his dialect, which is Tosk. About 70% of Albanians speak Geg-Albanian and different variation of this.

In short what I'm saying is that you base your discussion on the Albanian language and history on very little information. You go on comparing words and sentences as if albanian only has one dialect. It has infact 4 dialects that can be VERY different from eachother. Also for you interessted in this topic, look out for a large volume on albanian language/history that is to be published by some Austrians (don't remember their names). I'm hoping this will be as objective/neutral as possible.

Also there is no ill intent behind this comment, only to give you some information about the language since this is probably the only forums I've seen where serbs, greek and albanians actually discuss things instead of throwing the F-word at eachother.

i agree with you on the part of the traduction, thought alabanians are genetically similar with egeo-mediterranean people of south east europe, italy too, and people of northern balkans.

Alabanians, at least thosei see in italy don't look central european, at least like italians don't look central european too.

you can see it here, albanians are near southern italians, greeks, makedonians and bulgarians
Europegenetics.jpg

the balkans who can be more near to central europeans, are some bosnians, slovenians and croatians.
Serbs are like northern italians, protending more to central europe, but still southern europeans
 
hmmm have you ever thought that greek okeanos latin aqua and egyptian aswan might mean the same?
 
hmmm have you ever thought that greek okeanos latin aqua and egyptian aswan might mean the same?

that's interesting, it might be a pelasgian connection
 
Well, welcome to Eupedia, Devil's Advocate.

First off, I must wholeheartedly agree when you say that this thread makes no sense. If you take a look into the posts I made in this thread, it is very obvious. I must admit that although I'm not an expert on Albanian, I can tell you that the general mainstream scientific consensus is that Albanian is an Indo-European language, whereas Etruscan is a non-Indo-European language.
It's on your right to agree or not. I would like to advise you to use more your brain than your heart (even that in a creative manner).
However, I have to accept you're lucky. You already found your own Advocate![FONT=arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
 
It's on your right to agree or not. I would like to advise you to use more your brain than your heart (even that in a creative manner).
However, I have to accept you're lucky. You already found your own Advocate!

i think, some Albanian ancient tribes could be related to pelasgian people, and supposedly etruscans were of pelasgian stock too, i think that area of europe, albania, greece, fyrom, bulgaria were colinized by some pelasgian tribes
 
i think, some Albanian ancient tribes could be related to pelasgian people, and supposedly etruscans were of pelasgian stock too, i think that area of europe, albania, greece, fyrom, bulgaria were colinized by some pelasgian tribes
It is quite true. I think that the center of pelasgian civilization may have been Atlanta. Then pelasgians spread over the Mediterranean (northern Africa, Asia Minor, the Balkans, Italy,etc.). Pelasgians were the true founders of human civilization. Pelasgian man excelled job and creativity, appreciated life more, had developed the feeling of love despite the aggression. The only "art" that could not recognize, was the war. He spread the knowledge which unfortunately became the weapon with which masters of aggression killed Pelasgian civilization.
 
It is quite true. I think that the center of pelasgian civilization may have been Atlanta. Then pelasgians spread over the Mediterranean (northern Africa, Asia Minor, the Balkans, Italy,etc.). Pelasgians were the true founders of human civilization. Pelasgian man excelled job and creativity, appreciated life more, had developed the feeling of love despite the aggression. The only "art" that could not recognize, was the war. He spread the knowledge which unfortunately became the weapon with which masters of aggression killed Pelasgian civilization.

Sorry, no. That is just pure fantasy.
 
Sorry, no. That is just pure fantasy.

while on atlantis, recently digs around southern Spain, I think it was called dodona ( andulusian lands) is calimed by scientists to be "atlantis" .:grin:
 
It's on your right to agree or not. I would like to advise you to use more your brain than your heart (even that in a creative manner).
However, I have to accept you're lucky. You already found your own Advocate!

You need to check what my name(Devil's advocate) means my fellow albanian ;)
from wiki "In common parlance, a devil's advocate is someone who, given a certain argument, takes a position he or she does not necessarily agree with, just for the sake of argument. In taking such position, the individual taking on the devil's advocate role seeks to engage others in an argumentative discussion process. The purpose of such process is typically to test the quality of the original argument and identify weaknesses in its structure, and to use such information to either improve or abandon the original, opposing position. It can also refer (less commonly) to someone who takes a stance that is seen as unpopular or unconventional, but is actually another way of arguing a more conventional stance"

I'm just pointing out that you can't conclude on, probably, anything, we can discuss, but given the relative low access on information we can't really conclude on anything. The Albanian languange and culture has been hidden for a long time, which means two things. 1) books written by other balkan authors are usually biased due to nationalism and 2) The questions will be answered through archeology, since the Illyrians didn't have a written culture. People need to be in addition carefull on basing arguments on books written by people who have never been in Albania or albanian lands. Our culture can not be described by any religion. It is totally different from the Turkish one, and it has in common with the serbian culture as what the Norwegians have in common with the Japanese culture, which is absolutelly nothing. I suggest anyone who is interessted in our language and culture to read books on our folklore and mythologies, you'll often find very interesting things there that can be linked to earlier balkanic cultures.

Also new books are steadily being published on this matter, I'm actually writting a paper on the Illyrians where I'll try and provide new point of views on certain historic events.

Btw I'm no linguist, can someone show me how the Albanian language is an Indo-European language, on what criteria is this decision based on.
 
Btw I'm no linguist, can someone show me how the Albanian language is an Indo-European language, on what criteria is this decision based on.

It's very hard to elaborate this shortly, but, Albanian has numerous words which are cognates with PIE and which are shifted according to specific Albanian sound laws. The most obvious feature about Albanian that reveals it's Indo-European nature are it's numerals. The Indo-European languages as a whole are extremely conservative when it comes to numerals, and you can readily compare Albanian numerals with those in other IE languages. There is also similar grammatical structure.
 
It is quite true. I think that the center of pelasgian civilization may have been Atlanta. Then pelasgians spread over the Mediterranean (northern Africa, Asia Minor, the Balkans, Italy,etc.). Pelasgians were the true founders of human civilization.

I thought it was the Sumerians.
 
However, not being likely is not the same as not being possible... some time ago, I was also intrigued by tribal name of Tosks resembling Tuscany... and there are somewhat ellevated levels of J2 and R1a YDNA haplogroups in both Tuscany and in Tosk Albanians (not in Ghegs)... So, I do not deny possibility for genetical and perhaps even to some extent linguistic relationships between two areas... btw. there are also interesting attempts to link Etruscan to Finno-Ugric languages...

As i told you in an older message, there is no connection between Toskë and Tuscans.

The names Tuscany, Tuscans, Etruscans derive form Latin word tuscus (probably from TUR, a root of Anatolian or Lydian origin. Greek Tursenoi/Tyrsēnoi/Tyrrēnoi, English Tyrrhens). Tuscus is not an Etruscan word, it's an exonym. Etruscans called themselves Rasna or Rasenna, not Tusci.

The Albanian name Tosk is an exonym (Albanian toskë) and it was borrowed from Italian (through the Venetian?) tosko or tosco that means "rough, crude", the same of Spanish adjective of Latin origin "Tosco" that means "crude, rough, coarse; raw; uncouth; clumsy". Italian and Spanish "Tosco" derive from Latin Tuscus and had two different meanings, although both share same root. The first meaning, the original one, is "Tuscan" (Etruscan-Tuscan); the second meaning, a later born meaning, is "rude" because of the disreputable character of the inhabitants of the Vicus Tuscus, that was an Etruscan Street in ancient Rome, but not more inhabited by Etruscans. The second meaning is perfectly preserved in Spanish and it's the right etimology of Albanian Tosk.
 
Last edited:
As i told you in an older message, there is no connection between Toskë and Tuscans.

The names Tuscany, Tuscans, Etruscans derive form Latin word tuscus (probably from TUR, a root of Anatolian or Lydian origin. Greek Tursenoi/Tyrsēnoi/Tyrrēnoi, English Tyrrhens). Tuscus is not an Etruscan word, it's an exonym. Etruscans called themselves Rasna or Rasenna, not Tusci.

The Albanian name Tosk is an exonym (Albanian toskë) and it was borrowed from Italian (through the Venetian?) tosko or tosco that means "rough, crude", the same of Spanish adjective of Latin origin "Tosco" that means "crude, rough, coarse; raw; uncouth; clumsy". Italian and Spanish "Tosco" derive from Latin Tuscus and had two different meanings, although both share same root. The first meaning, the original one, is "Tuscan" (Etruscan-Tuscan); the second meaning, a later born meaning, is "rude" because of the disreputable character of the inhabitants of the Vicus Tuscus, that was an Etruscan Street in ancient Rome, but not more inhabited by Etruscans. The second meaning is perfectly preserved in Spanish and it's the right etimology of Albanian Tosk.

tosco is not venetian, there is no such word , be it modern or ancient, the words similare are:
tos = cough
torza = blasphemy
etrosco = ancient venetic for etruscan

crude or rough = greve,grue

what you refer to is Dante who resided in Ravenna at the time , toying with local picene language, words ( north or south ), with the word tosco. Romagnola dialect.

he said
non pomi v'eran, ma stecchi con tosco ............which means

no apples where there, but thorns with poison

In italian it would be ( correct me if I am wrong ) no mele era li, mah rami con veleno

In venetian it would be ..........no pomi era la, ma spini con beverin ( or sometimes velen , depends on poison )

raw in venetian is either bek or cru depending if its food or not
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 207133 times.

Back
Top