Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 187

Thread: Thracians spoke Balto Slavic language

  1. #76
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    930
    Points
    13,152
    Level
    34
    Points: 13,152, Level: 34
    Level completed: 72%, Points required for next Level: 198
    Overall activity: 19.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    1 members found this post helpful.


    Quote Originally Posted by albanopolis View Post
    Romanian language is a creole of latin+dacian. Today's Romanian vocabulary is consistent with after Christ Latin vocabulary. In other words, latin in Romania was borrowed after christ, which is consistent with the time Romans invaded Dacia. So see the difference: Albanian latin borrowings are consistent with prechrist latin (Time when Illyria was invaded), Romanian latin borrowings with afterchrist latin( time when Dacia was invaded). I don't know much about Romania. One thing is clear that today's Romania has absorbed a lot of slavic genes and language.
    Well you do not even know basic history.
    A part of Dacia was under Roman Empire,but only for 125 years.
    A much larger of Dacia was under Goths,Ostrogoths etc for a longer period,but Romanian barely has any borrowings from East Germanic languages.
    How this can be explained?

    And 2nd ,as number of words common with other languages,in Romanian,are Slavic languages,especially Bulgarian.
    At least 20% of the words from Romanian are common with some Slavic language.
    But it seems that if you also take Old Slavic and common words with South Slavic dialects,like Macedonian,is even more.
    Romanian also have some cognates with Albanian,that are not common with Latin or Slavic,about 300 or towards 500 words.

    Now coming back to the Roman conquest of Dacia,areas like Moldavia were never conquered by Roman Empire,however,those people are speaking Romanian with a little different accent.
    And they (Moldovans,not matter if they are from Bessarabia or from Moldavia from Romania) have a lot of I2A and 2nd R1A1.And most are wide faced,which is common with Eastern Slavs and Baltids,not with any Balkanic people,for your info.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ro..._271_AD%29.svg
    As you can see the people inhabiting that area,during Roman Empire conquest,are still called Daci,Carpi (which was a Dacian tribe),Sarmatae (which were Iranic people,or proto-Slavic people,or mixture of both,anyway,Satem speakers,most blue eyed and light haired) and Bastarnae.
    Bastarnae are not known what they are,if they were Celtic or Scytho-Sarmatian people.
    Not to mention Romanian sonority is quite unique in Europe,sharing some letters/sounds with Eastern Slavs,which are not present in any other language from Europe and have plenty of other harsh sounds as Z,J etc which were not found in Latin and are not found in any Romance language either.
    (except French,but this is not really Romance,more like Gallo-Romance).
    So is clear that Romanian have plenty of words common with Romance languages,not only Italian but also lots with French,but how does this makes these words borrowed from Latin?
    I do not understand why this theory,which says,Spanish,French,Portuguesse,are coming from Latin?
    I think this theory (even if very supported) have same logic as saying that Swedish/Norwegian/Danish,English,Dutch etc all are coming from German.
    I think is much more logic to suppose it existed a proto-Romance language from which Latin,Italian,Romanian,Spanish etc split.
    And would be quite logical that Illyrians were speaking some kind of proto-Romance,since they were living very closed to Italy.

  2. #77
    Regular Member Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,119
    Points
    29,699
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,699, Level: 52
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 51
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    Well you do not even know basic history.
    A part of Dacia was under Roman Empire,but only for 125 years.
    A much larger of Dacia was under Goths,Ostrogoths etc for a longer period,but Romanian barely has any borrowings from East Germanic languages.
    How this can be explained?

    And 2nd ,as number of words common with other languages,in Romanian,are Slavic languages,especially Bulgarian.
    At least 20% of the words from Romanian are common with some Slavic language.
    But it seems that if you also take Old Slavic and common words with South Slavic dialects,like Macedonian,is even more.
    Romanian also have some cognates with Albanian,that are not common with Latin or Slavic,about 300 or towards 500 words.

    Now coming back to the Roman conquest of Dacia,areas like Moldavia were never conquered by Roman Empire,however,those people are speaking Romanian with a little different accent.
    And they (Moldovans,not matter if they are from Bessarabia or from Moldavia from Romania) have a lot of I2A and 2nd R1A1.And most are wide faced,which is common with Eastern Slavs and Baltids,not with any Balkanic people,for your info.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ro..._271_AD%29.svg
    As you can see the people inhabiting that area,during Roman Empire conquest,are still called Daci,Carpi (which was a Dacian tribe),Sarmatae (which were Iranic people,or proto-Slavic people,or mixture of both,anyway,Satem speakers,most blue eyed and light haired) and Bastarnae.
    Bastarnae are not known what they are,if they were Celtic or Scytho-Sarmatian people.
    Not to mention Romanian sonority is quite unique in Europe,sharing some letters/sounds with Eastern Slavs,which are not present in any other language from Europe and have plenty of other harsh sounds as Z,J etc which were not found in Latin and are not found in any Romance language either.
    (except French,but this is not really Romance,more like Gallo-Romance).
    So is clear that Romanian have plenty of words common with Romance languages,not only Italian but also lots with French,but how does this makes these words borrowed from Latin?
    I do not understand why this theory,which says,Spanish,French,Portuguesse,are coming from Latin?
    I think this theory (even if very supported) have same logic as saying that Swedish/Norwegian/Danish,English,Dutch etc all are coming from German.
    I think is much more logic to suppose it existed a proto-Romance language from which Latin,Italian,Romanian,Spanish etc split.
    And would be quite logical that Illyrians were speaking some kind of proto-Romance,since they were living very closed to Italy.
    I would not be surprised if the illyrians spoke some form of celto-raetic-luburdian language because celtic culture in eastern austria was created with the illyrians/nori in noricum. centuries later the illyrians moved/invaded south balkans with the celts following .
    i just wonder if pannonian whic was illyro-thraci language was involved as well
    có che un pòpoło no 'l defende pi ła só łéngua el xe prónto par èser s'ciavo

    when a people no longer dares to defend its language it is ripe for slavery.

  3. #78
    Regular Member Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,119
    Points
    29,699
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,699, Level: 52
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 51
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    books say difference about thracian language

    http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...guages&f=false

    Thracian and greek where similar but had difference
    Macedonian was completely different from greek and Thracian
    Venetians use dh at start of some words , it represents the same as th in english, same sound as the word thing

  4. #79
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    22-02-13
    Posts
    553


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    Well you do not even know basic history.
    A part of Dacia was under Roman Empire,but only for 125 years.
    A much larger of Dacia was under Goths,Ostrogoths etc for a longer period,but Romanian barely has any borrowings from East Germanic languages.
    How this can be explained?

    And 2nd ,as number of words common with other languages,in Romanian,are Slavic languages,especially Bulgarian.
    At least 20% of the words from Romanian are common with some Slavic language.
    But it seems that if you also take Old Slavic and common words with South Slavic dialects,like Macedonian,is even more.
    Romanian also have some cognates with Albanian,that are not common with Latin or Slavic,about 300 or towards 500 words.

    Now coming back to the Roman conquest of Dacia,areas like Moldavia were never conquered by Roman Empire,however,those people are speaking Romanian with a little different accent.
    And they (Moldovans,not matter if they are from Bessarabia or from Moldavia from Romania) have a lot of I2A and 2nd R1A1.And most are wide faced,which is common with Eastern Slavs and Baltids,not with any Balkanic people,for your info.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ro..._271_AD%29.svg
    As you can see the people inhabiting that area,during Roman Empire conquest,are still called Daci,Carpi (which was a Dacian tribe),Sarmatae (which were Iranic people,or proto-Slavic people,or mixture of both,anyway,Satem speakers,most blue eyed and light haired) and Bastarnae.
    Bastarnae are not known what they are,if they were Celtic or Scytho-Sarmatian people.
    Not to mention Romanian sonority is quite unique in Europe,sharing some letters/sounds with Eastern Slavs,which are not present in any other language from Europe and have plenty of other harsh sounds as Z,J etc which were not found in Latin and are not found in any Romance language either.
    (except French,but this is not really Romance,more like Gallo-Romance).
    So is clear that Romanian have plenty of words common with Romance languages,not only Italian but also lots with French,but how does this makes these words borrowed from Latin?
    I do not understand why this theory,which says,Spanish,French,Portuguesse,are coming from Latin?
    I think this theory (even if very supported) have same logic as saying that Swedish/Norwegian/Danish,English,Dutch etc all are coming from German.
    I think is much more logic to suppose it existed a proto-Romance language from which Latin,Italian,Romanian,Spanish etc split.
    And would be quite logical that Illyrians were speaking some kind of proto-Romance,since they were living very closed to Italy.
    I am not a linguist. I don't know if you are. If you are not, every discussion about languages is waste of time, is like two deaf people talking.

  5. #80
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    22-02-13
    Posts
    553


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Ike View Post
    It's kinda like jumping into your own mouth. Chill out dude.
    I don't get your point. I don't know where you get the information about Albanian language. I am a native speaker of that language and I know what am I talking about. If you have entertaining porpuse in your mind keep doing what you doing.

  6. #81
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    930
    Points
    13,152
    Level
    34
    Points: 13,152, Level: 34
    Level completed: 72%, Points required for next Level: 198
    Overall activity: 19.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by albanopolis View Post
    I am not a linguist. I don't know if you are. If you are not, every discussion about languages is waste of time, is like two deaf people talking.
    What I wrote,about the multitude of Slavic words in Romanian,is well known about most Romanian scholars.
    What is not known,is how these words got here.
    Some supposition which is accepted by most says that Thraco-Dacian population from Romania was very low,after lots of fights,so they accepted a lot of Slavic people,to settle in Romania.
    From these people these words came.
    However,if South Romania would have had a lot of Slavs here,should be more light haired.
    So I think the source of most words might have been from Dacian that conquest old population.
    Sadly,there are very very few autosomal tests made for Romanians,to see how much Western admixture is here.
    I do agree that most Albanian genetics is from Illyrians and 2nd,from Thraco-Dacians because there is too much Western admixture in Albanians,compared to South Slavs from near them.
    However,the language can not be descendant of Illyrian,but of Thraco-Dacian,because is Satem language.

  7. #82
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,331
    Points
    113,888
    Level
    100
    Points: 113,888, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    Well you do not even know basic history.
    A part of Dacia was under Roman Empire,but only for 125 years.
    A much larger of Dacia was under Goths,Ostrogoths etc for a longer period,but Romanian barely has any borrowings from East Germanic languages.
    How this can be explained?

    And 2nd ,as number of words common with other languages,in Romanian,are Slavic languages,especially Bulgarian.
    At least 20% of the words from Romanian are common with some Slavic language.
    But it seems that if you also take Old Slavic and common words with South Slavic dialects,like Macedonian,is even more.
    Romanian also have some cognates with Albanian,that are not common with Latin or Slavic,about 300 or towards 500 words.

    Now coming back to the Roman conquest of Dacia,areas like Moldavia were never conquered by Roman Empire,however,those people are speaking Romanian with a little different accent.
    And they (Moldovans,not matter if they are from Bessarabia or from Moldavia from Romania) have a lot of I2A and 2nd R1A1.And most are wide faced,which is common with Eastern Slavs and Baltids,not with any Balkanic people,for your info.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ro..._271_AD%29.svg
    As you can see the people inhabiting that area,during Roman Empire conquest,are still called Daci,Carpi (which was a Dacian tribe),Sarmatae (which were Iranic people,or proto-Slavic people,or mixture of both,anyway,Satem speakers,most blue eyed and light haired) and Bastarnae.
    Bastarnae are not known what they are,if they were Celtic or Scytho-Sarmatian people.
    Not to mention Romanian sonority is quite unique in Europe,sharing some letters/sounds with Eastern Slavs,which are not present in any other language from Europe and have plenty of other harsh sounds as Z,J etc which were not found in Latin and are not found in any Romance language either.
    (except French,but this is not really Romance,more like Gallo-Romance).
    So is clear that Romanian have plenty of words common with Romance languages,not only Italian but also lots with French,but how does this makes these words borrowed from Latin?
    I do not understand why this theory,which says,Spanish,French,Portuguesse,are coming from Latin?
    I think this theory (even if very supported) have same logic as saying that Swedish/Norwegian/Danish,English,Dutch etc all are coming from German.
    I think is much more logic to suppose it existed a proto-Romance language from which Latin,Italian,Romanian,Spanish etc split.
    And would be quite logical that Illyrians were speaking some kind of proto-Romance,since they were living very closed to Italy.
    I always wondered if there were some Italic tribes in Romania in pre-Roman and Roman times. Left over after Italics' migration from East to West? They came from somewhere East, settled in Valachia(?), then after few centuries, half of them moved to Italy, half stayed there. This might explain dominance of Romance/Vlach language in this area, In other areas it was easier for Thracians to change to old Slavic, because of similarities and satem nature of these two languages.
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  8. #83
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Ike's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-12-10
    Posts
    1,128
    Points
    4,720
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,720, Level: 20
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 330
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Quote Originally Posted by albanopolis View Post
    I don't get your point. I don't know where you get the information about Albanian language. I am a native speaker of that language and I know what am I talking about. If you have entertaining porpuse in your mind keep doing what you doing.
    I just don't see how can you not get the point. Nobody is that stupid. You're joking with us, right?

  9. #84
    Emperor Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    10-04-13
    Posts
    2,120
    Points
    4,787
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,787, Level: 20
    Level completed: 35%, Points required for next Level: 263
    Overall activity: 14.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a1a3 (T-PF7443)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Country: Italy



    The Romans imposed Latin on the inhabitants of Romania (mostly Dacians derived from Illyrians). This is known fact, it took place during roman rule of the region.

  10. #85
    Emperor Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    10-04-13
    Posts
    2,120
    Points
    4,787
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,787, Level: 20
    Level completed: 35%, Points required for next Level: 263
    Overall activity: 14.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a1a3 (T-PF7443)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Country: Italy



    In 700 A.D. Slavic tribes made a heavy push from the Russian plains towards east-Central Europe. This movement could explain many modern European Slavic derived tongues such as Polish, Czech, Slovak, Slovenian, Croatian in part, Serbian (not Hungarian as this is a Finno-Ugric language) etc.

  11. #86
    Emperor Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    10-04-13
    Posts
    2,120
    Points
    4,787
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,787, Level: 20
    Level completed: 35%, Points required for next Level: 263
    Overall activity: 14.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a1a3 (T-PF7443)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Country: Italy



    I don't see what else could explain a Common Slavic linguistic link in these nations and a few others, if not for movements of Slavs holding the R1a marker from the Ukrainian refuge genera legion.

  12. #87
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    17-03-13
    Posts
    763
    Points
    6,210
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,210, Level: 23
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 340
    Overall activity: 5.0%


    Country: Sweden



    Quote Originally Posted by adamo View Post
    The Romans imposed Latin on the inhabitants of Romania (mostly Dacians derived from Illyrians). This is known fact, it took place during roman rule of the region.
    This is pure Ceausescu propaganda.
    "The grouping of Dacian, Illyrian and Thracian languages into a Thraco-Illyrian branch of the Indo-European language family, a widespread idea in the first half of the 20th century, has lost popularity because of the lack of convincing evidence."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Romanians

  13. #88
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Ike's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-12-10
    Posts
    1,128
    Points
    4,720
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,720, Level: 20
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 330
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Quote Originally Posted by adamo View Post
    In 700 A.D. Slavic tribes made a heavy push from the Russian plains towards east-Central Europe. This movement could explain many modern European Slavic derived tongues such as Polish, Czech, Slovak, Slovenian, Croatian in part, Serbian (not Hungarian as this is a Finno-Ugric language) etc.
    Why exclude Hungary? Their relation with Uralic tribes is more lingustical and formal, than genetical.

    I think that Slavs inhabited central Europe spreading from 4 rivers (Don, Dniester, Dnieper, Danube) up to river Oder, Vistula and Laba, but that was situation long before AD. Everything suggests that Goths made a big push towards East and South. After that we had Slavs pushing South to the borders of Byzant and Constantinople. Middle East was already in war. You don't go to war if don't have much to plunder. Inhabitants of Europe (Goths, Celts and Slavs) were probably very poor comparing to Levant and Mediterranean so they had no reason to wage wars amongst themselves. It was probably the appearance of money that started all that fuss.

  14. #89
    Emperor Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    10-04-13
    Posts
    2,120
    Points
    4,787
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,787, Level: 20
    Level completed: 35%, Points required for next Level: 263
    Overall activity: 14.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a1a3 (T-PF7443)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Country: Italy



    I was ONLY speaking linguistically dude, of course modern Hungarians are not related to Finno-Ugrians but to nearby Europeans.

  15. #90
    Emperor Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    10-04-13
    Posts
    2,120
    Points
    4,787
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,787, Level: 20
    Level completed: 35%, Points required for next Level: 263
    Overall activity: 14.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a1a3 (T-PF7443)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Country: Italy



    I2a, R1a, R1b; all these European paternal groups are very present in the Hungarian y-DNA melting pot, everyone knows that.

  16. #91
    Emperor Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    10-04-13
    Posts
    2,120
    Points
    4,787
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,787, Level: 20
    Level completed: 35%, Points required for next Level: 263
    Overall activity: 14.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a1a3 (T-PF7443)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Country: Italy



    So wait a minute gyms, you are contesting that the Romans imposed Latin tongue on Romania?

  17. #92
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points
    Nobody1's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-03-13
    Posts
    1,040
    Points
    5,756
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,756, Level: 22
    Level completed: 42%, Points required for next Level: 294
    Overall activity: 34.0%


    Country: Germany - Baden-Wurttemberg



    Quote Originally Posted by Ike View Post
    Why exclude Hungary? Their relation with Uralic tribes is more lingustical and formal, than genetical.

    I think that Slavs inhabited central Europe spreading from 4 rivers (Don, Dniester, Dnieper, Danube) up to river Oder, Vistula and Laba, but that was situation long before AD. Everything suggests that Goths made a big push towards East and South. After that we had Slavs pushing South to the borders of Byzant and Constantinople. Middle East was already in war. You don't go to war if don't have much to plunder. Inhabitants of Europe (Goths, Celts and Slavs) were probably very poor comparing to Levant and Mediterranean so they had no reason to wage wars amongst themselves. It was probably the appearance of money that started all that fuss.
    Not really sure about the warfare between Goths, Slavs and Kelts (given the timeline) but there was a lot of warfare between the so-called "Barbarians" before the common enemy Rome;

    Strabo - VII/III
    Boerebistas a Getan, on setting himself in authority over the tribe, restored the people, who had been reduced to an evil plight by numerous wars, and raised them to such a height through training, sobriety, and obedience to his commands that within only a few years he had established a great empire and subordinated to the Getae most of the neighboring peoples. And he began to be formidable even to the Romans, because he would cross the Ister with impunity and plunder Thrace as far as Macedonia and the Illyrian country; and he not only laid waste the country of the Celti who were intermingled with the Thracians and the Illyrians, but actually caused the complete disappearance of the Boii who were under the rule of Critasirus,

    Strabo equates the Getae with the Daci as does Cassius and both Cassius and Herodotus considered the Getae to be Thracians living on both sides of the Danube/Ister;

    Than there is also the account of Ariovistus (Plutarch/Appian) a Germanic chieftain (most prob. Herminonen) that crossed the Rhine into Gallic territory and the Gauls calling the Romans for help;
    Or this passage from Caesar's Commentaries -

    Julius Caesar - De Bello Gallico I/I
    Of all these, the Belgae are the bravest, because they are furthest from the civilization and refinement of Province, and merchants least frequently resort to them, and import those things which tend to effeminate the mind; and they are the nearest to the Germans, who dwell beyond the Rhine, with whom they are continually waging war; for which reason the Helvetii also surpass the rest of the Gauls in valor, as they contend with the Germans in almost daily battles, when they either repel them from their own territories, or themselves wage war on their frontiers.

    And judging by the cemeteries of the Gauls/Kelts and Thracians (Iron-age onwards) and the vast amounts of Gold/Silver in them - neither was that poor to begin with; In-fact more prosperous than most Greek cities and early Rome;

  18. #93
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    17-03-13
    Posts
    763
    Points
    6,210
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,210, Level: 23
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 340
    Overall activity: 5.0%


    Country: Sweden



    Quote Originally Posted by adamo View Post
    So wait a minute gyms, you are contesting that the Romans imposed Latin tongue on Romania?
    Exactly.What geographical area do you mean when you say Romania?

  19. #94
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    22,749
    Level
    46
    Points: 22,749, Level: 46
    Level completed: 20%, Points required for next Level: 801
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by adamo View Post
    In 700 A.D. Slavic tribes made a heavy push from the Russian plains towards east-Central Europe. This movement could explain many modern European Slavic derived tongues such as Polish, Czech, Slovak, Slovenian, Croatian in part, Serbian (not Hungarian as this is a Finno-Ugric language) etc.
    In the time of Thracianas there was practically same distribution of haplogroups in the Balkans as today. Slavs changed the haplogroup situation in the Balkans less than 5%. Why Balkan inhabitants easily adopted South Slavic language? Because languages natives and newcomers probably were similar. There are scientists in the world who claim that native inhabitants and newcomers spoke very similar language. If this is true Balto Slavic languages ​​are spoken in the Balkans 4 millennia or more.

  20. #95
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    22-02-13
    Posts
    553


    Country: Albania



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    In the time of Thracianas there was practically same distribution of haplogroups in the Balkans as today. Slavs changed the haplogroup situation in the Balkans less than 5%. Why Balkan inhabitants easily adopted South Slavic language? Because languages natives and newcomers probably were similar. There are scientists in the world who claim that native inhabitants and newcomers spoke very similar language. If this is true Balto Slavic languages ​​are spoken in the Balkans 4 millennia or more.
    Entertaining. Salute for the sense of humor!

  21. #96
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    22,749
    Level
    46
    Points: 22,749, Level: 46
    Level completed: 20%, Points required for next Level: 801
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by albanopolis View Post
    Entertaining. Salute for the sense of humor!
    Maybe you can laugh the science, or maybe you don’t like the science, and why not, everyone can have own believing.

    But the things are complex, and the science tries to give us the answers for this complexity. Of course, definitive answers often are not possible. Thus, the science has paradigms, theories, hypothesis, etc. Coming to know is not easy.

    There are several paradigms of origins of Indo-European languages: Copper age theory, Neolithic theory and Paleolitic continue theory.

    For our theme this third paradigm is most interesting. Paleolithic continue theory has a lot of scientists: Ballester, Cavazza, Hausler, Poghire, Alinei, etc.

    According these opinions languages are much more ancient. Different grammatical structures are more ancient than Copper Age or Neolithic, and they reflect slow development process. It means that there is continuity with Paleolithic. Differentiation of languages was very very slow process.

    We can here speak about very interesting things, and about different cultures in space-time continuum from Caspian sea (and further to the East) to Western Europe, and from Paleolithic to Chalcolitic, but it would be require a lot of time and it is not for this theme. It is for other topics, and some of them are already open.

    We can consider Balto-Slavic area which reaches almost half of Europe. We will here focus only to Slavic area. And languages in this area are much more homogenous than languages in Western Europe. Also, Slavic languages have unique asymmetric distribution. Traditional theory about Slavs and Slavic language in the light of Paleolithic continue theory is not sustainable. The newer knowledge from lot of sciences: archeology, linguistics and (geolinguistcs), genetics, paleoanthropology, cognitive sciences etc. are in according to Paleolithic continue theory.

    The scientists discovered one very important asymmetry in Slavic languages: Southern bloc in Slavic languages is unique, but Northern bloc is divided in two branches: Western and Eastern branch. According to Paleolitic continue theory the scientists can find explanation for this:

    Souther Slavic was earlier core, Northern branches had later development!

    This discovery was done by Italian scientist Mario Alinei. Modern science based on Paleolitic continue theory says that great migration of Slavs to the Balkans didn’t exist, and that Slavs, or as the inhabitants of these areas have already called, were there from remote times.

  22. #97
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    22-02-13
    Posts
    553


    Country: Albania


  23. #98
    Regular Member Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,119
    Points
    29,699
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,699, Level: 52
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 51
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by albanopolis View Post
    so dacians, moesians and Getaens are not thracian, is this what you refer to ?

  24. #99
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Ike's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-12-10
    Posts
    1,128
    Points
    4,720
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,720, Level: 20
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 330
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Quote Originally Posted by adamo View Post
    I was ONLY speaking linguistically dude, of course modern Hungarians are not related to Finno-Ugrians but to nearby Europeans.
    Ye, ye, no problem, just making sure we're on the same latitude.

  25. #100
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Ike's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-12-10
    Posts
    1,128
    Points
    4,720
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,720, Level: 20
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 330
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody1 View Post
    Not really sure about the warfare between Goths, Slavs and Kelts (given the timeline) but there was a lot of warfare between the so-called "Barbarians" before the common enemy Rome;

    Strabo ... Julius Caesar ...

    And judging by the cemeteries of the Gauls/Kelts and Thracians (Iron-age onwards) and the vast amounts of Gold/Silver in them - neither was that poor to begin with; In-fact more prosperous than most Greek cities and early Rome;
    I know about those times, but I was thinking some way further in the past. In Strabo's time gold coins already existed, and everyone in Europe was aware of the value of the gold and were digging for it. I'm thinking before ~ 700 BC.
    Yes I agree, there must have been wars, especially with the neighbours, but I have a feeling that great movements of "all male" warrior groups didn't happen before good/silver money was adopted.

    I know that gold was valued thousands of years before that, but I'm not sure that Goths were aware of Pharaoh's love for gold? Another problem is did they have it? Cause, even if Goths were aware of the value of the Gold in like 5000 BC, it wouldn't do them any good to start a war campaign into Slavic tribes which have none of it.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •