Illyrian and Albanian - a linguistic approach

Oh my God. After the two fake "albanians".i.e serbs, now we have here another serb who deny that he is a serb. I agree, you have all the right to deny your nationality.
 
Initially i did not intend to intervene in this thread. But after reading this post:

i decided to say few words.
So we have here two serb members with their strange and alternative theories, and Sille which as usually expresses his sympathy to the Albanians.





This forums are a possibility for people to discuss. There is nothing wrong If be discussed, various alternative theories. The problem with Serbs is that all of their discussions about Albanians, in all forums, are ridiculous and alternative discussions.
These people, the Serbs, in their school books teach that Albanians are descendants of the Illyrians. Once they join a forum, they forget what they have learned in school and change suddenly in trollls.

Why this?


The problem with the Serbs is that they suffer from an inferiority complex. Their situation can be explain with this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
It is a universally known fact that in the Balkans, Serbs had come from Asia. There are different theories for the origin of the Serbs, ranging from distant Siberia and Afghanistan and to the theory until now acceptable, according to which the Serbs originated somewhere in Caucasus or somewhere around Caspian Sea


All this is ridiculous. Go ahead guys.

What I will say it is not offend, probably you are very young.

Your text is childish that any discussion with you is redundant, it is not worth the effort.

A priori I do not refuse to discuss, I suppose in next years when you have more years we will be able to discuss.
 
Last edited:
Laberia I am not Serb myself and if there is something you don't like no need to insult cause i guess you find yourself in that complex,but i happen to live in that land once called Illyria,if i don't represent theory of Albanian supreme leader Enver Hoxha doesn't mean i have no right to comment and have opinion,history is not always interpreted as you wish to be.
The theory is still taught to all Albanians, from primary school through to university.
You need to understand that you are become ridiculous.
You remember me this Serb, who is concerned about the history textbooks in Serbia.
http://www.naslovi.net/2013-11-30/p...tarosedeoci-a-srbi-dosljaci-na-balkan/7980500
Gg Translator:
SKANDALOZNO: Serbian history textbook: Albanians are autochthonous and Serbs are newcomers to the Balkans!

Albanians - natives and Serbs newcomers recent days in Balkan, I freely and carefully recorded the interesting history textbook for the sixth grade of primary school, published by the Institute for textbooks Belgrade. The author of the textbook Rade Mihaljčić is some shocking allegations. The author of the textbook Rade Mihaljčić is some shocking allegations.
After describing the arrival of the Slavs in the Balkans and the conflict with the natives author says "... however, the natives who lived together and whose settlements were grouped into larger groups were not slavonized. Customs, language, and other features preserved National Albanians. Part immigrated Slavs received the language and customs of Albanians and merged with them. "[3] Impressed with this statement, by accident I found the explanation in the first extended version of the same textbook, in a sentence that does not have at present:" Albanians are descended from indigenous people in the Balkan Peninsula, probably Illyrians, romanized to a lesser extent. With them they mix the ancient Greeks, Slavs and other peoples ... ". [4]

In this kind of serb articles we can find the origin of this alternative point of view of history, by serb members
All this is obviously not enough individual Serbian academics as is the case with Rade Mihaljčić. Who cares about the map of Europe in 814 years, where it is clear the Serbian state in the Balkans and Albania, which borders with Armenia and Azerbaijan.

The author is angry about the truth about Kosova.
Then I expanded my knowledge learning that "Stefan Nemanja conquered Kosovo and parts of northern Albania"

But the author is not contained in his unbridled fantasy:
After all this, I was convinced that I read the work of the Albanian historiography. Unfortunately I was wrong. Above that will be corrected in the author section of the Ottoman conquests, however: "After Marick and the Battle of Kosovo, Turks are increasingly threatening the Albanian authorities" [6]. After that talk about heroism George Kastriot Skanderbeg and not a single word notes that Skanderbeg was a Serb origin, or the arrival of Albanians in the Balkans after the collapse of the Arab Sicily.

SOURCE: Milan Damjanac / SRBIN.INFO

Do you read this?
Hence i tell you that you are becoming ridiculous in the eyes of the world.
Now can you tell me pls? What have to do Enver Hoxha in all this history?
 
You need to understand that you are become ridiculous.
You remember me this Serb, who is concerned about the history textbooks in Serbia.
http://www.naslovi.net/2013-11-30/p...tarosedeoci-a-srbi-dosljaci-na-balkan/7980500
Gg Translator:
SKANDALOZNO: Serbian history textbook: Albanians are autochthonous and Serbs are newcomers to the Balkans!



In this kind of serb articles we can find the origin of this alternative point of view of history, by serb members


The author is angry about the truth about Kosova.


But the author is not contained in his unbridled fantasy:



Do you read this?
Hence i tell you that you are becoming ridiculous in the eyes of the world.
Now can you tell me pls? What have to do Enver Hoxha in all this history?


P.S.
Can you provide an correct translation of the article in english pls? Thank you in advance.
 
And this are the books of sixth grade of primary school in Serbia:
auto_historia1439200120.jpg

hhh_8668.jpg


I understand that you want to discuss about history, but first you have to read this books.
 
Here this article/research is couple years ago i might post it,it is not by that Serbian propaganda but by Austrian scholars,revial the myths.

Austrian Scholars Leave Albania Lost for Words

Viennese researchers upset traditionally minded Albanians by pouring cold water on the theory that the Albanian language has its roots in Ancient Illyria.

Deep in the bowels of Vienna University, two Austrian academics are poring over the ancient texts of a far-away people in the Balkans.

Like a couple of detectives searching for clues, Stefan Schumacher and Joachim Matzinger are out to reconstruct the origins of Albanian - a language whose history and development has received remarkably little attention outside the world of Albanian scholars.


“The way that languages change can be traced,” Schumacher declares, with certainty.


Although the two men are simply studying 17th and 18th-century Albanian texts in order to compile a lexicon of verbs, their innocent-sounding work has stirred hot debate among Albanian linguists.


The root of the controversy is their hypothesis that Albanian does not originate from the language of the Ancient Illyrians, the people or peoples who inhabited the Balkans in the Greek and Roman era.


According to Classical writers, the Illyrians were a collection of tribes who lived in much of today’s Western Balkans, roughly corresponding to part of former Yugoslavia and modern Albania.


Although Albanian and Illyrian have little or nothing in common, judging from the handful of Illyrian words that archeologists have retrieved, the Albanian link has long been cherished by Albanian nationalists.


The theory is still taught to all Albanians, from primary school through to university.


It is popular because it suggests that Albanians descend from an ancient people who populated the Balkans long before the Slavs and whose territory was unfairly stolen by these later incomers.


“You’ll find the doctrine about the Illyrian origin of Albanians everywhere,” Matzinger muses, “from popular to scientific literature and schoolbooks. “There is no discussion about this, it’s a fact. They say, ‘We are Illyrians’ and that’s that,” he adds.


What’s in a name?


The names of many Albanians bear witness to the historic drive to prove the Illyrian link.



Pandeli Pani | Photo by : Idem Institute
Not Pandeli Pani. When he was born in Tirana in 1966, midway through the long dictatorship of Enver Hoxha, his father told the local registry office that he wished to name him after his grandfather.


Pani recalls his father’s hard-fought battle not to have to give his son an Illyrian name.


Staff at the civil registry office apparently said that naming the future linguistics professor after his grandfather was not a good idea, as he was dead. They suggested an approved Illyrian name instead.


“But the Illyrians aren’t alive either,” Pani recalls his father as quipping.


Many members of Pani’s generation born in the Sixties did not have such stubborn fathers. Their parents subscribed to the government policy of naming children after names drawn from ancient tombs.


In the eyes of the world, they aimed to cement the linkage between modern Albania and its supposedly ancient past.


“While I was named after my grandfather, keeping up a family tradition, other parents gave their children Illyrian names that I doubt they knew the meaning of,” says Pani, who today teaches at Jena university in Germany.


“But I doubt many parents today would want to name their children ‘Bledar’ or ‘Agron,’ when the first means ‘dead’ and the second ‘arcadian,” he adds.


Pani says that despite the Hoxha regime’s efforts to burn the doctrine of the Albanians’ Illyrian origins into the nation’s consciousness, the theory has become increasingly anachronistic.


“The political pressure in which Albania’s scientific community worked after the communist took over, made it difficult to deal with flaws with the doctrine of the Illyrian origin,” he said.


But while the Illyrian theory no longer commands universal support, it hasn’t lost all its supporters in Albanian academia.


Take Mimoza Kore, linguistics professor at the University of Tirana.



Mimoza Kore-Albanian
Speaking during a conference in November organised by the Hanns Seidel Foundation, where Pani presented Schumacher’s and Matzinger’s findings, she defended the linkage of Albanian and Illyrian, saying it was not based only on linguistic theory.


“Scholars base this hypothesis also on archeology,” Kore said. Renowned scholars who did not “subscribe blindly to the ideology of the [Hoxha] regime” still supported the idea, she insisted.


One of the key problems in working out the linguistic descendants of the Illyrians is a chronic shortage of sources.


The Illyrians appears to have been unlettered, so information on their language and culture is highly fragmentary and mostly derived from external sources, Greek or Roman.


Matzinger points put that when the few surviving fragments of Illyrian and Albanian are compared, they have almost nothing in common.


“The two are opposites and cannot fit together,” he says. “Albanian is not as the same as Illyrian from a linguistic point of view.”


Schumacher and Matzinger believe Albanian came into existence separately from Illyrian, orginating from the Indo-European family tree during the second millennium BC, somewhere in the northern Balkans.


The language’s broad shape resembles Greek. It appears to have developed lineally until the 15th century, when the first extant text comes to light.


“One thing we know for sure is that a language which, with some justification, we can call Albanian has been around for at least 3,000 years,” Schumacher says. “Even though it was not written down for millennia, Albanian existed as a separate entity,” he added.


Bastard tongues:


Linguists say different languages spoken in the same geographical area often reveal similarities, despite a lack of evidence of a common origin.


This phenomenon of linguistic “areas” is also evident in the Balkans, where such different languages as Albanian, Greek, Bulgarian and Romanian all share words and structures.


First written words in Albanian
The first written record of Albanian is a baptismal formula written in 1462 by the Archbishop of Durres, Pal Engjelli. The first book in Albanian, a missal, was written in 1554 by Gjon Buzuku, a Catholic priest from the Shkodra region.


Pjeter Budi, Archbishop of Sape, also translated and adapted several Italian texts to Albanian in the same period.


Schumacher and Matzinger are concentrating their scholarship mostly on the work of Pjeter Bogdani, Archbishop of Prizren, who wrote half-a-century later. He is considered the most interesting Albanian early writer and the “father” of Albanian prose.


Bogdani’s most famous work, The Story of Adam and Eve, his account of the first part of the Bible, is written in both Albanian and Italian. Matzinger says that when Bogdani published the book he was under some pressure from the Inquisition. As the Inquisition did not know Albanian, and were not sure what he wrote, they forced him to make an Italian translation, which is published in the left column of the book.


“That is most useful because it means that no sentence in the book [in Albanian] is incomprehensible,” Matzinger says.


Although numerous texts by Bogdani, Budi and some others survive, the variety of authors, mainly Catholic clerics, is small. “It would be interesting if we had a bigger variety of authors, though we’re grateful enough for what we do have,” Schumacher says.


According to Schumacher, from the Middle Ages onwards, languages throughout the Balkans tended to become more similar to one another, suggesting a high level of linguistic “exchange” between populations in the region.


“A lot of people used a number of languages every day, and this is one way in which languages influence each other,” Schumacher says. “The difficult thing is that this runs counter to nationalist theories,” he adds.


Drawing on genetic terminology, linguists term this process of language exchange language “bastardization”.


Following the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, the phenomenon of language bastardization has taken a new twist, moving in the opposite direction, as each newly formed state acts to shore up its own unique linguistic identity.


Before the common state collapsed, four of the six constituent republics, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Montenegro, shared a common language known as Serbo-Croat.


But since declaring independence in 1991, Croatia has consciously highlighted the distinct character of its language, now called “Croatian”.


Bosnian Muslims have made similar efforts in Bosnia and Herzegovina, promoting official use of a codified “Bosniak” language.


Montenegro, which remained in a loose state union with Serbia until 2006, then appeared content not to have its own separate language. But after independence, a new constitution adopted on October 2007 named the official language as Montenegrin.


Similar calls to foster a separate national language have been heard in Kosovo, drawing on the northern Albanian “Gegh” dialect, though none of these initiatives has received official encouragement.


Out of language, an identity:


The study of Balkan languages came of age in the later 19th century as the Ottoman Empire began disintegrating and as intellectuals tasked with creating new nations out of its rubble turned to language to help forge national identities.




Cover of Adam and Eve, from Pjeter Bogdani | Photo by : Stefan Schumacher
According Schumacher, each country in the Balkans forged its own national myth, just as Germany or the US had done earlier, with a view to creating foundations for a shared identity.


“In the late 19th century, language was the only element that everyone could identify with,” says Schumacher.


He described the use of linguistics in national mythology as understandable, considering the context and the time when these countries gained independence.


“It’s not easy to create an identity for Albanians if you just say that they descend from mountains tribes about whom the historians of antiquity wrote nothing,” he notes.


The friction between ideological myth and reality, when it comes to forging national identity, and laying claim to territory, is not unique to Albania.


Schumacher points out that Romanian history books teach that Romanians descend from the Roman legionnaires who guarded the Roman province of Dacia – a questionable theory to which few non-Romanians lend much credence, but which shores up Romania’s claim to Transylvania, a land to which Hungarians historically also lay claim.


“The Romanian language developed somewhere south of the Danube, but Romanians don’t want to admit that because the Hungarians can claim that they have been there before,” notes Schumacher.


“None of them is older or younger,” says Schumacher. “Languages are like a bacterium that splits up in two and than splits up in two again and when you have 32 bacteria in the end, they are all the same,” he added.


The two Austrian linguists say that within European academia, Albanian is one of the most neglected languages, which provides an opportunity to conduct pioneering work.


Although the extant texts have been known for a long time, “they hardly ever been looked at properly”, Schumacher says. “They were mostly read by scholars of Albanian in order to find, whatever they wanted to find,” he adds.

One does not need to be a linguist to know that much of the present day Albanian comes from Early Latin (bc).
10% of Alb language is from Early Greek. (bc)
There is small percentage from Gothic
To say that in these conditions Alb language comes from Caucasus means that the person communicating with is a regular patient of a mental facility.
About Austrian historians who deny connection between Alb and Illyrian: They Also say that alb language is the source of all European languages. If you believe that then you have to believe that the foundation of Slavic languages is Alb.
 
Garrick,

You never fail to crack me up. You know deep down that to deny the Illyrian origin of Albanians is like pissing against the wind, yet you try by any means to obfuscate the obvious by combing some selected quotes to cater your inferiority complex. That Albanian evolved chiefly from Illyrian, consisting a modern stage of Illyrian, as Mayer coined the expression, is not stated solely by Albanians. It's a largely-held view, in short the most widespread conclusion among scholars. Arguing with you is like talking to a brick wall; you just get tired pointlessly. I deliberately brought up some Serbian scholars who dwellt upon this question; both of them alike were mildly supportive to the view which sees Albanians as being natives to their present-day areas.

...

What wrong with your writing?

Yes in old texts in 19 century and a later (especially in time of Enver Hoxha) there were linguists who clam that Albanian and Illyrian are connected.

But how science has progressed linguists have noticed that evidence which would confirm the similarity of these languages doesn't exist.

Today it is clear that connection between Albanian and Illyrian is empty talk.

I give hard adamant facts but there are people who refuse facts.

Linguistic Research Center, The University of Texas at Austin, USA

Brian Joseph, Angelo Costanzo, and Jonathan Slocum

http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/eieol/albol-0-X.html

Albanian forms a separate branch of Indo-European and cannot conclusively be closely connected with any other Indo-European language. There have been attempts to connect Albanian with some of the sparsely attested ancient languages of the Balkans, particularly Illyrian but also Dacian and Thracian. While this is plausible geographically, given that we know the Illyrians lived in an area that includes the modern Albanian-speaking area, there is no concrete linguistic evidence for any of these proposals. Some have proposed a connection between the ancestor of Albanian (without assigning a specific identity to this ancestor) and a Latinized variety of that ancestor that may have ultimately yielded Romanian, as there are several shared words not of Latin origin in both languages.
...

Linguists clearly say that evidence about connection Albanian and Illyrian doesn't exist but Albanians here in forum not just what they are trying in various ways to refuse hard adamant facts that evidence doesn't exist, but they try with offensive vocabulary to discredit those who write that Albanian has no connection with Illyrian which is scientific fact.
 
One does not need to be a linguist to know that much of the present day Albanian comes from Early Latin (bc).
10% of Alb language is from Early Greek. (bc)
There is small percentage from Gothic
To say that in these conditions Alb language comes from Caucasus means that the person communicating with is a regular patient of a mental facility.
About Austrian historians who deny connection between Alb and Illyrian: They Also say that alb language is the source of all European languages. If you believe that then you have to believe that the foundation of Slavic languages is Alb.


The easiest thing is the insult of opponent. But it is so frivolous.
...

New Zealand scientists used new computational-modeling method. Their result is that Albanian has same root as Indic and Iranic language.

2003112611.jpg


My assumption is that proto Albanian originated probably somewhere in between (today's) Caucasus, northern Iran and eastern Turkey, maybe around Caspian sea. I suppose that carriers of R1b ht35 Armenian haplotype (and it is possible with carriers some another haplogoups) created this language. Albanian is Indo-European, Satem.
 
Linguists clearly say that evidence about connection Albanian and Illyrian doesn't exist but Albanians here in forum not just what they are trying in various ways to refuse hard adamant facts that evidence doesn't exist, but they try with offensive vocabulary to discredit those who write that Albanian has no connection with Illyrian which is scientific fact.

It's their's to prove it, let 'em try. Abeis, can you post a table with Illyrian words, where/how they are attested, and an Albanian parallel ?
 
It's their's to prove it, let 'em try. Abeis, can you post a table with Illyrian words, where/how they are attested, and an Albanian parallel ?

I really get incensed that all my patient efforts to incite a scholarly debate were fruitless. Individuals like Garrick have not the faintest idea about linguistics, yet they pretend to show themselves off as being accomplished scholars. When he's pressed hard to explain his stance, he emits a high pitched squeal with some random condescending remarks that stray away from the topic. It's so obnoxious, isn't? He knows pretty well the weakness of his position, yet he's trying desperately to escape by introducing peripheral arguments, uncorroborated claims and a plethora of half truths and faint facts to match a wished-for conclusion. Things like that give me a pain in the butt :annoyed:

You want to proceed further scrutinizing all extant evidence of Illyrian drawn from onomastics. Let us take a stab at it and be done with it! Apart from some lexical items, Albanian shares certain linguistic innovations with Illyrian. One must tackle the problem at its entirety: the time when PIE languages broke off from one another, got their peculiarities and came to settle permanently on their historical seats. Illyrian can be shoehorned with Albanian for the following reasons:

1. Both of them display the pattern of merging aspirated stops with un-aspirated ones. This very ancient development provides an interesting clue to delineate their likeliest group of affiliation: NW Indo-European, standing in nearby of Baltic, Dacian and Slavic.

2. IE *o gives a regular outcome /a/, an additional phonetic shift which set both Albanian and Illyrian in the same boat.

3. The prevocalic /*s/ is preserved both in Albanian and Illyrian, a rather conservative feature which account for their distinct character.

4. The diphthong /nd/ is being dissimilated in /n/ which occurred both in Albanian and Illyrian.

5. Illyrian explicit material is so slim, yet there seems some good reasons to discern some new glosses out of place-names. Thus Ulcinium (*ulekw-os) contains *Ulc-, which has as its cognate alb. ulk; Dalmatia contains either *dalm-, *delm- as the likely Illyrian word for ,sheep', evincing a relation with alb. delme; Dardania conveys a possible Illyrian word *dard- (pear), being the same with alb. dardhë and the list goes further.

6. Certain Illyrian place-names or river-names are preserved all over present-day Albanian territories. A descent number of them points out to the fact that proto-Albanian speakers were single-handedly responsible from transmitting them without any detraction. For example the Illyrian place-nameΣκόδρα is considered as the oldest form of modern Shkodra. The consonant cluster /sk/ is palatalized in line with laws governing Albanian phonetics as /shk/, whereas /dr/ remained untainted.

Here this article/research is couple years ago i might post it,it is not by that Serbian propaganda but by Austrian scholars,revial the myths.

Not sure whether to laugh or cry, but this really pisses me off. For the life of me I don't get why such a hasty on citing a crappy journalist article twisting Matzinger's position. If you had an ounce of seriousness, you would already read any article of him which are available on internet. Matzinger does not deny Illyrian origin of Albanians, he just tries to locate the earliest seats of Albanians acknowledging Dardania as the most plausible source where proto-Albanians spring from. Furthermore, he recognizes some irrefutable links between Messapic (a sibling language with Illyrian) and Albanian.
 
You want to proceed further scrutinizing all extant evidence of Illyrian drawn from onomastics. Let us take a stab at it and be done with it! Apart from some lexical items, Albanian shares certain linguistic innovations with Illyrian. One must tackle the problem at its entirety: the time when PIE languages broke off from one another, got their peculiarities and came to settle permanently on their historical seats. Illyrian can be shoehorned with Albanian for the following reasons:

1. Both of them display the pattern of merging aspirated stops with un-aspirated ones. This very ancient development provides an interesting clue to delineate their likeliest group of affiliation: NW Indo-European, standing in nearby of Baltic, Dacian and Slavic.

2. IE *o gives a regular outcome /a/, an additional phonetic shift which set both Albanian and Illyrian in the same boat.

3. The prevocalic /*s/ is preserved both in Albanian and Illyrian, a rather conservative feature which account for their distinct character.

4. The diphthong /nd/ is being dissimilated in /n/ which occurred both in Albanian and Illyrian.

5. Illyrian explicit material is so slim, yet there seems some good reasons to discern some new glosses out of place-names. Thus Ulcinium (*ulekw-os) contains *Ulc-, which has as its cognate alb. ulk; Dalmatia contains either *dalm-, *delm- as the likely Illyrian word for ,sheep', evincing a relation with alb. delme; Dardania conveys a possible Illyrian word *dard- (pear), being the same with alb. dardhë and the list goes further.

6. Certain Illyrian place-names or river-names are preserved all over present-day Albanian territories. A descent number of them points out to the fact that proto-Albanian speakers were single-handedly responsible from transmitting them without any detraction. For example the Illyrian place-nameΣκόδρα is considered as the oldest form of modern Shkodra. The consonant cluster /sk/ is palatalized in line with laws governing Albanian phonetics as /shk/, whereas /dr/ remained untainted.

I am familiar with the majority of postulates, but I was hoping to find an exact list with examples in Albanian, with pronunciation. Some of these things may have a weight, but some of them may be meaningless. The biggest problem for European scholars is that they have no or very little knowledge of Albanian, and there is no will to learn Albanian language, so we all leave it "as is" and take these postulates as granted, while not knowing the true extent and impact they have on the form of Albanian language.

Albanians on forums usually just repeat those and things alike as some sort of evidence, which they are not. They may be strong indicators, but not an evidence. FWIW Illyrian is poorly attested and PIE and it's diphthongs even more, and one has to make a very strong point for this to be accepted. I would like to see some effort from Albanian linguists' side, trying to convince others how and why these things are important and unique in Albanian language, with abundant set of examples. We also have to make a comparative analysis with other neighbouring languages to rule them out.
 
Initially i did not intend to intervene in this thread. But after reading this post:

i decided to say few words.
So we have here two serb members with their strange and alternative theories, and Sille which as usually expresses his sympathy to the Albanians.





This forums are a possibility for people to discuss. There is nothing wrong If be discussed, various alternative theories. The problem with Serbs is that all of their discussions about Albanians, in all forums, are ridiculous and alternative discussions.
These people, the Serbs, in their school books teach that Albanians are descendants of the Illyrians. Once they join a forum, they forget what they have learned in school and change suddenly in trollls.

Why this?


The problem with the Serbs is that they suffer from an inferiority complex. Their situation can be explain with this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
It is a universally known fact that in the Balkans, Serbs had come from Asia. There are different theories for the origin of the Serbs, ranging from distant Siberia and Afghanistan and to the theory until now acceptable, according to which the Serbs originated somewhere in Caucasus or somewhere around Caspian Sea


All this is ridiculous. Go ahead guys.

much appreciated

But when all is said, the Illyrian-Bosnians have the bulk of I2 dna which is over 5000 years older than the bulk of Illyrian-Albanian E ydna

The simple conclusion is the If illyrians are in all of what is Roman Illyricium, then the only clear cut marker is I2 ..........

And Slavs are neither Illyrians if this is your concern
 
It's their's to prove it, let 'em try. Abeis, can you post a table with Illyrian words, where/how they are attested, and an Albanian parallel ?


You will see, nobody from Albanian will not comment facts which give Joseph, Costanzo and Slocum.

But they try to discredit who mention these authors, but such way of discreditation is immature.

About respecting other people's opinions and the culture of dialogue, there are no words.

And they will put linguists who lived before 200-300 years.

Because connection between Illyrian and Albanian is empty talk.

Except for Enver Hoxha way of thinking.

But Slavic (mostly Serbian) contributed to Albanian with about 1000 words.

Albanian borrowed from Slavic (mostly Serbian) mainly nouns, then verbs.

Svane (1992),
some words which Albanian borrowed from Slavic (Serbian, Bulgarian):

plow: plug (Serbian) - pllug (Albanian)

tool, implements: oruđe (Serb.) - orendi (Alb.)

cucumber: krastavac (Serb.) - kastravec (Alb.)

donkey: magarac (Serb.), магаре (Bulgarian) - magare (Alb.)

hill: breg (Serb.) - breg (Alb.)

bone: kost (Serb.) - kockë (Alb.)

teen, need: nevolja (Serb.) - nevojë (Alb.)

rich: bogat (Serb.), begat (Alb.)

order: poručiti (Serb.) поръчвам (Bulg.) - porosit (Alb.)

...

There are sources which claim that when Albanians came to todays Albania (between 5-10 century, probably 8-9 century), there were Greeks, Armanji (Aromunians), Serbs and maybe Bulgarians. And it is clear that Albanian was able to borrow Slavic (Serbian and Bulgarian) words. Of course Slavic words Albanian could borrow earlier, in Romania, Ukraine, Moldavia. And why not, Slavic languages could borrow from Albanian. Albanian and Slavic languages have long mingled in various areas.
 
I really get incensed that all my patient efforts to incite a scholarly debate were fruitless. Individuals like Garrick have not the faintest idea about linguistics, yet they pretend to show themselves off as being accomplished scholars. When he's pressed hard to explain his stance, he emits a high pitched squeal with some random condescending remarks that stray away from the topic. It's so obnoxious, isn't? He knows pretty well the weakness of his position, yet he's trying desperately to escape by introducing peripheral arguments, uncorroborated claims and a plethora of half truths and faint facts to match a wished-for conclusion. Things like that give me a pain in the butt :annoyed:

You want to proceed further scrutinizing all extant evidence of Illyrian drawn from onomastics. Let us take a stab at it and be done with it! Apart from some lexical items, Albanian shares certain linguistic innovations with Illyrian. One must tackle the problem at its entirety: the time when PIE languages broke off from one another, got their peculiarities and came to settle permanently on their historical seats. Illyrian can be shoehorned with Albanian for the following reasons:

1. Both of them display the pattern of merging aspirated stops with un-aspirated ones. This very ancient development provides an interesting clue to delineate their likeliest group of affiliation: NW Indo-European, standing in nearby of Baltic, Dacian and Slavic.

2. IE *o gives a regular outcome /a/, an additional phonetic shift which set both Albanian and Illyrian in the same boat.

3. The prevocalic /*s/ is preserved both in Albanian and Illyrian, a rather conservative feature which account for their distinct character.

4. The diphthong /nd/ is being dissimilated in /n/ which occurred both in Albanian and Illyrian.

5. Illyrian explicit material is so slim, yet there seems some good reasons to discern some new glosses out of place-names. Thus Ulcinium (*ulekw-os) contains *Ulc-, which has as its cognate alb. ulk; Dalmatia contains either *dalm-, *delm- as the likely Illyrian word for ,sheep', evincing a relation with alb. delme; Dardania conveys a possible Illyrian word *dard- (pear), being the same with alb. dardhë and the list goes further.

6. Certain Illyrian place-names or river-names are preserved all over present-day Albanian territories. A descent number of them points out to the fact that proto-Albanian speakers were single-handedly responsible from transmitting them without any detraction. For example the Illyrian place-nameΣκόδρα is considered as the oldest form of modern Shkodra. The consonant cluster /sk/ is palatalized in line with laws governing Albanian phonetics as /shk/, whereas /dr/ remained untainted.



Not sure whether to laugh or cry, but this really pisses me off. For the life of me I don't get why such a hasty on citing a crappy journalist article twisting Matzinger's position. If you had an ounce of seriousness, you would already read any article of him which are available on internet. Matzinger does not deny Illyrian origin of Albanians, he just tries to locate the earliest seats of Albanians acknowledging Dardania as the most plausible source where proto-Albanians spring from. Furthermore, he recognizes some irrefutable links between Messapic (a sibling language with Illyrian) and Albanian.

illyrian personnel names

found only in southern austria to southern croatia and across to southern Bosnia

anaeus = austria area ...also found annaius and annaeus

bateia = pannonia ........also found there is bato

batelis = southern slovenia

binhdo = illyrian womens name from the delmatae tribe

candala = mans name among the delmatae ...............matches place name in austria candalicae

dasius = croatia and pannonia

dastro = womens name from the delmatae tribe ................also widely used by women when illyria was under Rome.

epantia = from croatia area of illyrian japontes tribe, origin from pantia

lavus = from delmatae tribe also used the name lavi

liccaius = from pannonia and croatia tribes, name found on 2 illyrian seals

messia and messor
= delmatae tribe where the danube meet the sava river

panes = delmatae tribe

sutta = austrian area

yemaio = used also as surname, unsure of origins

All the following are from Noricum Austria - darbosa, blaus, camaius, cemaia, tromperus

endings with aio and eio are not guaranteed illyrian, but could be of celtic mix with illyrian.
 
I really get incensed that all my patient efforts to incite a scholarly debate were fruitless. Individuals like Garrick have not the faintest idea about linguistics, yet they pretend to show themselves off as being accomplished scholars. When he's pressed hard to explain his stance, he emits a high pitched squeal with some random condescending remarks that stray away from the topic. It's so obnoxious, isn't? He knows pretty well the weakness of his position, yet he's trying desperately to escape by introducing peripheral arguments, uncorroborated claims and a plethora of half truths and faint facts to match a wished-for conclusion. Things like that give me a pain in the butt

You want to proceed further scrutinizing all extant evidence of Illyrian drawn from onomastics. Let us take a stab at it and be done with it! Apart from some lexical items, Albanian shares certain linguistic innovations with Illyrian. One must tackle the problem at its entirety: the time when PIE languages broke off from one another, got their peculiarities and came to settle permanently on their historical seats. Illyrian can be shoehorned with Albanian for the following reasons:

1. Both of them display the pattern of merging aspirated stops with un-aspirated ones. This very ancient development provides an interesting clue to delineate their likeliest group of affiliation: NW Indo-European, standing in nearby of Baltic, Dacian and Slavic.

2. IE *o gives a regular outcome /a/, an additional phonetic shift which set both Albanian and Illyrian in the same boat.

3. The prevocalic /*s/ is preserved both in Albanian and Illyrian, a rather conservative feature which account for their distinct character.

4. The diphthong /nd/ is being dissimilated in /n/ which occurred both in Albanian and Illyrian.

5. Illyrian explicit material is so slim, yet there seems some good reasons to discern some new glosses out of place-names. Thus Ulcinium (*ulekw-os) contains *Ulc-, which has as its cognate alb. ulk; Dalmatia contains either *dalm-, *delm- as the likely Illyrian word for ,sheep', evincing a relation with alb. delme; Dardania conveys a possible Illyrian word *dard- (pear), being the same with alb. dardhë and the list goes further.

6. Certain Illyrian place-names or river-names are preserved all over present-day Albanian territories. A descent number of them points out to the fact that proto-Albanian speakers were single-handedly responsible from transmitting them without any detraction. For example the Illyrian place-nameΣκόδρα is considered as the oldest form of modern Shkodra. The consonant cluster /sk/ is palatalized in line with laws governing Albanian phonetics as /shk/, whereas /dr/ remained untainted.



Not sure whether to laugh or cry, but this really pisses me off. For the life of me I don't get why such a hasty on citing a crappy journalist article twisting Matzinger's position. If you had an ounce of seriousness, you would already read any article of him which are available on internet. Matzinger does not deny Illyrian origin of Albanians, he just tries to locate the earliest seats of Albanians acknowledging Dardania as the most plausible source where proto-Albanians spring from. Furthermore, he recognizes some irrefutable links between Messapic (a sibling language with Illyrian) and Albanian.

We read about this more time.

You have not say anything new.

And who search in Slavic languages or another IE can find similar, but it does not speak about continuity of Slavic language or Albanian language, neither Albanians or Slavs are descedants of Illyrians.

World recognized authority for Illyrians, John Wilkes wrote that Albanians cannot link with Illyrians through language or anything else.

He argues that Albanian is Satem and Illyrian is Centum and nobody cannot find continuity between them, these two languages are mutualy exclusive.

John Wilkes completely crashed Illyrian Albanian myth, he led research in Yugoslavia and Albania and basis on sceletal evidence he concluded that Albanians have no links with Illyrians (after that and DNA evidence has confirmed his conclusions).

No one Albanian has published a critical paper of Wilkes monumental study. Why? Therefore and Albanians know Wilkes is right but most do not talk about it.

It is fun what you gave yourself Illyrian name for forum, but it doesn't matter,

here is your chance:

you will conduct a serious multidisciplinary scientific research, and attempt to deny Mr. Wilkes.

You can do it, no doubt.

We are waiting for your conclusions.
 
Abeis to you all things all ends that Albanian is ancestor of Illyrian,i think that you don't even know the situation in the Roman province Illyricum,just as Taranis reply to you couple languages are recorded there according to toponymy not one,Antonio Sciarretta is researcher of those old toponyms in the province of Illyricum,this is what he writes about it;

The linguistic situation of the Roman province of Illyricum is rather unclear and highly disputed between supporters of its (at least partly) satem feature.Moreover, this hypothetic satem language is often intepreted as to be the ancestor of the modern Albanian language.


Actually, toponymy suggests that there was at least one satem stratum, in Illyria proper and surprisingly in the inner part of southern Dalmatia (parts of today Hercegovina, Montenegro and Sandjak). However, this language cannot be the direct ancestor of Albanian for many reasons. It may tentatively be identified with a Mysian-like language. Continuity theory supporters would rather suggest that it should be identified with an early Slavic language, already present close to the historical Slavic domain.


In Liburnia, a Venetic stratum is easily recognizable for the typical presence of an f from PIE *bh, dh. As recognized by Georgiev and others, Venetic has nothing to do with "Illyrian".


In the rest of Liburnia, in Dalmatia, and in part of Illyria proper, a poorly characterized linguistic stratum may be reconstructed from some typical suffixes, like -etium from *-ent-, from the development of sonants like *n>un and generally for many points of contact with the opposite side of the Adriatic sea. especially Samnium and Apulia. This stratum has been called here Illyrian for what concerning Apulia. Possibly this group of languages coincides with the "Central Illyrian-Pannonian" of the classification (based on anthroponyms) of Katicic'.

I Should add that Albanian words for fish etc are borrowed from other languages which suggest that they were not living near sea.
 
Abeis to you all things all ends that Albanian is ancestor of Illyrian,i think that you don't even know the situation in the Roman province Illyricum,just as Taranis reply to you couple languages are recorded there according to toponymy not one,Antonio Sciarretta is researcher of those old toponyms in the province of Illyricum,this is what he writes about it;

The linguistic situation of the Roman province of Illyricum is rather unclear and highly disputed between supporters of its (at least partly) satem feature.Moreover, this hypothetic satem language is often intepreted as to be the ancestor of the modern Albanian language.


Actually, toponymy suggests that there was at least one satem stratum, in Illyria proper and surprisingly in the inner part of southern Dalmatia (parts of today Hercegovina, Montenegro and Sandjak). However, this language cannot be the direct ancestor of Albanian for many reasons. It may tentatively be identified with a Mysian-like language. Continuity theory supporters would rather suggest that it should be identified with an early Slavic language, already present close to the historical Slavic domain.


In Liburnia, a Venetic stratum is easily recognizable for the typical presence of an f from PIE *bh, dh. As recognized by Georgiev and others, Venetic has nothing to do with "Illyrian".


In the rest of Liburnia, in Dalmatia, and in part of Illyria proper, a poorly characterized linguistic stratum may be reconstructed from some typical suffixes, like -etium from *-ent-, from the development of sonants like *n>un and generally for many points of contact with the opposite side of the Adriatic sea. especially Samnium and Apulia. This stratum has been called here Illyrian for what concerning Apulia. Possibly this group of languages coincides with the "Central Illyrian-Pannonian" of the classification (based on anthroponyms) of Katicic'.

I Should add that Albanian words for fish etc are borrowed from other languages which suggest that they were not living near sea.

Question is if he understand what you ask him. I appreciate every member and it is not offense, but he mixes very different things and does not respect authorities.

Question between Illyrian and Albanian is solved, science has found that proofs for connectivity Illyrian and Albanian don't exist.

But for me is much more interesting linking Slavic languages and Albanian, and more linguists participate in this, it is important for Eupedia readers.

Bulgarian and another scientists found a large numbers of toponyms of Slavic (Serbian and Bulgarian) origin in Albania.

This is only small sample and by one Bulgarian author:

Список славянских топографических названий в Албании.
Славянское население в Албании
А. Селищев


Бабица
Бабонье
Бабунья Бабонье
Balari
Баништа
Баня
Бацка Бачка
Бачка
Бачова
Баштова
Башча
Бела
Белабрада
Белай
Б лград
Б ле могиле
Белина
Белица Горна Долна
Беличица
Белишова
Белова
Беловода
Белче
Белъград
Бежани
Берагожда
Берат
Берзана
Беришинь доль
Беровичка
Бестрова
Бигори
Бистрица
Bjelica
Блата
Блаца
Блаче
Бобичко
Боборава
Бобоштица, Бобошчица
Богдан
Богоница Богуница b
Богуница
Богшик Белева
Бодриста Бодришта
Бодришта
Божаник
Bosanic Божаник
Божиград
Божица
Bo ik' Божица
Боз
Бозбрегас
Бозовец
Бозовци Бозовец
Бойдан
Борова
Борич
...
etc

What is interesting, there are Slavic toponyms the most in Southern Albania, although it generally has throughout whole Albania.

According these toponyms Serbs and Bulgars lived in whole Albania. Question is when Albanians came to today's Albania.



selish_slavicnames2.gif
 
illyrian personnel names

found only in southern austria to southern croatia and across to southern Bosnia

anaeus = austria area ...also found annaius and annaeus
bateia = pannonia ........also found there is bato
batelis = southern slovenia
binhdo = illyrian womens name from the delmatae tribe
candala = mans name among the delmatae ...............matches place name in austria candalicae
dasius = croatia and pannonia
dastro = womens name from the delmatae tribe ................also widely used by women when illyria was under Rome.
epantia = from croatia area of illyrian japontes tribe, origin from pantia
lavus = from delmatae tribe also used the name lavi
liccaius = from pannonia and croatia tribes, name found on 2 illyrian seals
messia and messor
= delmatae tribe where the danube meet the sava river
panes = delmatae tribe
sutta = austrian area
yemaio = used also as surname, unsure of origins
All the following are from Noricum Austria - darbosa, blaus, camaius, cemaia, tromperus

endings with aio and eio are not guaranteed illyrian, but could be of celtic mix with illyrian.


OK, but what we know about the original forms? This set of names seems to me too diverse and not stemming from a single language. For example lots of names, like Liccaius, seems to be Latinized. What does the seal exactly say? What period was it from, before or after Romanization? Is it only the Latin suffix, or the name was transliterated? Whatever books you read, things get very uncertain, like:

1. What this means? Some say Butta, some Sutta, and then they propose Illyrian origin. Is the name attested or not? This is not serious...

Weber, LUPA and Clauss/Slaby read Sutta and an "Illyrian" origin of the name has been suggested. If reading as Butta is correct, the name is etymologically related to either PCelt. *butā- 'dwelling, place, hut' (EDPC 84) (cf. OIr. both, MW bod) or pace Meid 261 from the PIE root *bhū- 'to hit' (cf. OIr. bibdu 'enemy, guilty')

http://www.univie.ac.at/austria-celtica/personalnames/details.php?id=8


2. Is it Iadastin as in Dustin Hoffman, or it is Iadasin as in Slavic Radasin. That syllable /t/ can't just pop-up in there from nothing
Is it Iadro as Jadran which is the name for the Adriatic sea, or is it like Iader (city of Zadar). This is the same case as with foreigners trying to write Thracian. Again Greek transliteration?

iadastin.jpg


http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/10470/1/10470_7267-vol1.PDF


3. Etc... This lists can go on and on. This is all very inconclusive, inconvincible, and needs a reexamination.
 
OK, but what we know about the original forms? This set of names seems to me too diverse and not stemming from a single language. For example lots of names, like Liccaius, seems to be Latinized. What does the seal exactly say? What period was it from, before or after Romanization? Is it only the Latin suffix, or the name was transliterated? Whatever books you read, things get very uncertain, like:

1. What this means? Some say Butta, some Sutta, and then they propose Illyrian origin. Is the name attested or not? This is not serious...

Weber, LUPA and Clauss/Slaby read Sutta and an "Illyrian" origin of the name has been suggested. If reading as Butta is correct, the name is etymologically related to either PCelt. *butā- 'dwelling, place, hut' (EDPC 84) (cf. OIr. both, MW bod) or pace Meid 261 from the PIE root *bhū- 'to hit' (cf. OIr. bibdu 'enemy, guilty')

http://www.univie.ac.at/austria-celtica/personalnames/details.php?id=8


2. Is it Iadastin as in Dustin Hoffman, or it is Iadasin as in Slavic Radasin. That syllable /t/ can't just pop-up in there from nothing
Is it Iadro as Jadran which is the name for the Adriatic sea, or is it like Iader (city of Zadar). This is the same case as with foreigners trying to write Thracian. Again Greek transliteration?

View attachment 7557


http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/10470/1/10470_7267-vol1.PDF


3. Etc... This lists can go on and on. This is all very inconclusive, inconvincible, and needs a reexamination.



And I agree with some being latinized from illyrian Sutta to latinized Suttihus as per the person noted Aelius Suttihus, who was Romanized.

These names cover a period of 500bc to 10ad

The conclusion of the study from Ruhr-Universitat Bochum is that the Pannonnii and the Delmatae spoken the same language and the other illyrian tribes who where neighbours of these , like the liburnians, Iazepes etc spoke a very different language.

But I think we all know this is the case with the illyrians and why we find very little script to a people that existed for at least 800 years.


BTW, I just found this 10 year old study...page 17 is the linguistic divide.............its in Spanish so I cannot decipher everything in the paper

http://www.anthroinsula.org/resources/Iliri -spanish presentation.pdf
 
OK, but what we know about the original forms? This set of names seems to me too diverse and not stemming from a single language. For example lots of names, like Liccaius, seems to be Latinized. What does the seal exactly say? What period was it from, before or after Romanization? Is it only the Latin suffix, or the name was transliterated? Whatever books you read, things get very uncertain, like:

1. What this means? Some say Butta, some Sutta, and then they propose Illyrian origin. Is the name attested or not? This is not serious...

Weber, LUPA and Clauss/Slaby read Sutta and an "Illyrian" origin of the name has been suggested. If reading as Butta is correct, the name is etymologically related to either PCelt. *butā- 'dwelling, place, hut' (EDPC 84) (cf. OIr. both, MW bod) or pace Meid 261 from the PIE root *bhū- 'to hit' (cf. OIr. bibdu 'enemy, guilty')

http://www.univie.ac.at/austria-celtica/personalnames/details.php?id=8


2. Is it Iadastin as in Dustin Hoffman, or it is Iadasin as in Slavic Radasin. That syllable /t/ can't just pop-up in there from nothing
Is it Iadro as Jadran which is the name for the Adriatic sea, or is it like Iader (city of Zadar). This is the same case as with foreigners trying to write Thracian. Again Greek transliteration?

View attachment 7557


http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/10470/1/10470_7267-vol1.PDF


3. Etc... This lists can go on and on. This is all very inconclusive, inconvincible, and needs a reexamination.

You're right, but it is hard to someone achieve strict records, Sile's findings is interesting, anyway.

Certainly, it is important to we know and Slavic toponyms in Albania and elsewhere in region.

And modern linguists explore links Slavic languages (Serbian, Bulgarian, etc.) with Albanian and they find many common characteristics.

To return to Illyrian names, a lot of names Bato, Batina, Bojken, Panto, Pantelia, Pajo, Tato etc. have cognates or meaning in Slavic languages.

There are thinkings that Albanian took some words from Slavic which Slavic borrowed from Illyrian, these thinkings correspodent with with the assumption that Albanians came late in the territory of today's Albania and there were Slavs (fact is that Slavic toponyms are in whole Albania).

Probably Slavic languages, Armanji (Aromanian), Albanian etc. borrowed from older languages, and of course, among themselves, newer research say to us that Albanian borrowed about 1000 Slavic words, mostly nouns.
 

This thread has been viewed 329881 times.

Back
Top