Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 154

Thread: How to divide Slavs from Balts, and vice-versa before 6th century?

  1. #101
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-05-18
    Posts
    59
    Points
    907
    Level
    7
    Points: 907, Level: 7
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 43
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by qtr View Post
    I have read, that US linguists do not use term Indo-Europeans, but instead use Eurasians, as there are still a lots of IE speaking people outside India and Europe. I could just start with counting armenians, kurdish, all indo-iranyans in Iran and Afganistan, even Pakistan(but I regard it as Indian region), so term Indo-European is really bad or - terrible to describe modern and not to mention - ancient distribution of IE languages.

    1. No. There really do not exist term of proto-Balts in relation to PIE. If you reacted to this, you clearly have no clue about topic.
    The only proto-balts you will get will be about much much later proto-Latvian-Lithuanian baltic language, that will be called proto-Baltic. And to make matters worse it is also very misleading, because by proto it is meant as pre Latvian-Lithuanian baltic languages(not that very different, but still), that existed before Latvian-Lithuanian influx. As for your understanding of PIE, I'm aware of that and this is actually what I meant, that PIE = proto-Baltic, and if you will prove otherwise, well... we will have a Nobel prize award(of how it is possible to break science) to Brasilian ;)

    2. Proto-Greeks were not even PIE, but semitic at best. If you insist, that all pre-hellenic greeks were PIE, you have no idea about topic.

    3. There is no Common PIE the way you describe it. Balts has nothing in common with germanic nonPIE lingual ancestry, because germanic language contain 30% of nonPIE lexicon and lingists are pulling hairs from their shiny heads to understand from where it comes. Also nothing in common with nonPIE greek, and neither with any other nonPIE ancestry of indo-iranian, who has heavy dravidian or even Indus valley civilisation extinct language influences. There is nothing more proto-PIE, than Baltic, because they are most archaic - to all languages, including recent development of slavic, which is not archaic as baltic is. If you can't understand what means archaic, well - Baltic languages are relic to ALL IE languages. I'm not saying, that they have not changed, but the closest to PIE you will have is any Baltic language.

    4. I do not know anything about timing calculations that are made about divergence of Western and Eastern Baltic and I would like to have that data for me, if you can provide. Although - you are also not correct about understanding what are West and East balts, as the process between West and Eastern Balts is not divergence, but actually completelly opposite. I can only give you timings for divergence between modern latvian and lithuanian and it is ~1500 ya.

    5. I can call Baltic anything, that can be shuffled under continuous Baltic dialect continium and where it can be proven as such. Slavic, also some other extinct language groups quite comfortably fit under this description, so it is just a matter of technical definition. From my experience we will come to this - eventually.

    6. I do not care what most linguists call something, as you can't solve in these matters something by mere voting... What matters to me - if that is logical and if that actually makes sense. Don't get the wrong idea - I do actually read what linguists write(too much, actually), but as I mentioned - they have to have some sense and leave no unfinished questions to their ideas.
    Me, as somebody who is studying linguistic know some things. That what you are calling "Balts" and "Baltic" is actually Balto-Slavic, since both ethnicities have origin from that. Imagine that there is group of people, let's call it "A", without identity and self-awareness. Then, one big group of people separated from "A", picked up other cultures such as Sarmatian, and meet the Romans and they described them as "Slavs". Other group stayed to live in swamps and also preserved archaic features of language, and later is called "Balts". It is fruitless would you call it "Baltic" or anything else. Baltic could be the term for many languages from this language. If you look from this perspective the Slavs at best could be called as "South Balts" but never Prussians as you said. In general, modern Balts are Eastern Balts and have nothing to do with your view of term "Balts". So, today, Slavs are Slavs, originally from proto-Slavs, and Balts are Balts originally from proto-Balts, and never in drems you shouldn't think that Slavic language developed from modern Baltic "Eastern Baltic". So, the term Balts today means Eastern Balts, and no Slavs doesn't originate from it. That what you are calling for some reason Balts should be called Balto-Slavic. Regards.

  2. #102
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,548
    Points
    62,907
    Level
    77
    Points: 62,907, Level: 77
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 343
    Overall activity: 26.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Balts or Slavs?:

    Spiginas2 (1 sample), Lithuania, 2130-1750 BCE, R1a-Z280>CTS1211
    Turlojiske3 (1 sample), Lithuania, 1010–800 BCE, R1a-Z92>Y4459>YP617
    Kivutkalns (3 samples), Latvia, 805–230 BCE, R1a-Z280>CTS1211>YP1034>Y13467

  3. #103
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-05-18
    Posts
    59
    Points
    907
    Level
    7
    Points: 907, Level: 7
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 43
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    Balts or Slavs?:

    Spiginas2 (1 sample), Lithuania, 2130-1750 BCE, R1a-Z280>CTS1211
    Turlojiske3 (1 sample), Lithuania, 1010–800 BCE, R1a-Z92>Y4459>YP617
    Kivutkalns (3 samples), Latvia, 805–230 BCE, R1a-Z280>CTS1211>YP1034>Y13467
    What is the point of these results?

  4. #104
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,548
    Points
    62,907
    Level
    77
    Points: 62,907, Level: 77
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 343
    Overall activity: 26.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by Srbadija View Post
    What is the point of these results?
    According to some theories, during the Bronze Age Balts did not live in what is now Latvia and Lithuania, but in the forest zone of Russia and Belarus (see for example the map below). But we have R1a from Bronze Age Baltic states, and autosomally they were like modern Balts?:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trzciniec_culture


  5. #105
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-05-18
    Posts
    59
    Points
    907
    Level
    7
    Points: 907, Level: 7
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 43
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    According to some theories, during the Bronze Age Balts did not live in what is now Latvia and Lithuania, but in the forest zone of Russia and Belarus (see for example the map below). But we have R1a from Bronze Age Baltic states, and autosomally they were like modern Balts?:

    Even if they lived, they were expelled or assimilated by Eastern Slavs.

    Point is: What we define as modern term "Balts" (Letto-Lithuanians) and what for Baltic continuum (Balto-Slavs hypothetical community)?

  6. #106
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    17-08-18
    Posts
    49
    Points
    583
    Level
    6
    Points: 583, Level: 6
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 167
    Overall activity: 31.0%


    Country: Madagascar



    I'm studying linguistic about the same as proper linguists would do, even if that is not my main speciality and have to do some extensive research into this topic, as my main thesis is related of pattern searching in linguistics for AI, however modern linguists would not agree neither with you, nor OP.


    Language in time and space. On the problem of the Slavic Glottogenesis (2004) pp93-96 by V. V. Martynov. His main research interests were Slavic languages, comparative linguistics, formalisation of semantics.
    Поэтапно снимая пласты славянской лексики и частично грамматики, возникшие в результате конвергентных процессов, мы все ближе подходим к первичному ингредиенту, который неизбежно оказывается балтийским. Балтийский характер первичного ингредиента праславянского языка доказывается путем исследования дивергентных процессов и прежде всего мощного инновационного процесса суффиксальной именной деривации, проходившей в протобалтийском и составившем основные формантно-функциональные ресурсы праславянского именного словообразования. Сопоставляя конвергенцию и дивергенцию в их определяющих, диагностирующих факторах, мы неизменно приходим к выводу о дочернем характере протославянского языкового состояния сравнительно с протобалтийским.
    In short: conclusion is that whole tree of Proto-Slavic languages are daughter offshot of Proto-Baltic and not some language group of their own.
    Actually 1st edition of book was out in 1983, so this is not something new - I think, that the problem of this discussion is that neither OP nor any others here does have any idea what Baltic languages are and how they differ from Slavic. This is not that hard task - it requires only learning one of Baltic languages, to see, that Slavic is rather simplified version of Baltic language - more or less same vocabulary and more simplified rules of more complex Baltic grammar. Even wiki has some notes, that current model of Baltic-Slavic is not correct model, that Slavic should be placed as branch under Baltic - clearly it has not branched off from modern Baltic languages, but some other, who are now extinct, but that is not really an issue - there are many dead Baltic languages to whom we know name, but there were even more Baltic languages who went extinct and no sources have left even their names.

  7. #107
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    625
    Points
    6,444
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,444, Level: 23
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 106
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by laint View Post
    I'm studying linguistic about the same as proper linguists would do, even if that is not my main speciality and have to do some extensive research into this topic, as my main thesis is related of pattern searching in linguistics for AI, however modern linguists would not agree neither with you, nor OP.


    Language in time and space. On the problem of the Slavic Glottogenesis (2004) pp93-96 by V. V. Martynov. His main research interests were Slavic languages, comparative linguistics, formalisation of semantics.


    In short: conclusion is that whole tree of Proto-Slavic languages are daughter offshot of Proto-Baltic and not some language group of their own.
    Actually 1st edition of book was out in 1983, so this is not something new - I think, that the problem of this discussion is that neither OP nor any others here does have any idea what Baltic languages are and how they differ from Slavic. This is not that hard task - it requires only learning one of Baltic languages, to see, that Slavic is rather simplified version of Baltic language - more or less same vocabulary and more simplified rules of more complex Baltic grammar. Even wiki has some notes, that current model of Baltic-Slavic is not correct model, that Slavic should be placed as branch under Baltic - clearly it has not branched off from modern Baltic languages, but some other, who are now extinct, but that is not really an issue - there are many dead Baltic languages to whom we know name, but there were even more Baltic languages who went extinct and no sources have left even their names.
    If Sanskrit has similarities with Slavic language does it mean that carriers of that old Slavic language coming from Baltic to India?

    https://cache.eupedia.com/images/con...ration_map.jpg

    Expansion of R1a people starts from Russian steppes to Baltic and towards India. Source of their language is in the Russian steppes not in Baltic therefore source of the Slavic language is in the area of Russia.

  8. #108
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    17-08-18
    Posts
    49
    Points
    583
    Level
    6
    Points: 583, Level: 6
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 167
    Overall activity: 31.0%


    Country: Madagascar



    Quote Originally Posted by hrvat22 View Post
    If Sanskrit has similarities with Slavic language does it mean that carriers of that old Slavic language coming from Baltic to India?

    https://cache.eupedia.com/images/con...ration_map.jpg

    Expansion of R1a people starts from Russian steppes to Baltic and towards India. Source of their language is in the Russian steppes not in Baltic therefore source of the Slavic language is in the area of Russia.
    Sanskrit is constructed language - never been used by any nation or folk as primary language. Sanskrit shares part of vocabulary with living IE languages - the other part is mainly mix of nonIE languages, that were fused into Aryan and Sanskrit is used to identify which are those ancient words, that modern IE languages are still using. 2000BC Sanskrit language grammar have some archaical features, that some of IE languages use, but Sanskrit has never been used by Z93 in Europe nor any other IE people in Europe - it is development of IE in South Asia and compared to proto-IE, even modern Lithuanian is more archaic, even if it lacks some grammar forms still preserved in Sanskrit and other IE languages. Anyway - leave Sanskrit out of this - if you will find how Slavic languages got their vocabulary in Europe, then you will know how Aryan languages got it. IMO, involvement of Aryan languages means also discussing Harrapan, Dravidian, even Elamian and other now vanished language influences, that has to be deconstructed to understand how they sounded before. That is rather very large and unnecessary task for this topic.

    Origin of Slavic people east of Baltic people has never been in consideration.
    There are also no proposals, that Slavic people originated in steppes.

    Spot that is shown as origin of Z93 on map is located exactly over water basin of Oka, that from immemorable times has been inhabited by Baltic tribes. However oldest Z93 are found in more to the east in Sintashta, so map is not correct there.

    Baltic people did not originated in Baltic states, but on Dnieper water basin where they populated this area from earliest times of R1a. Oldest findings of R1a and also oldest findings of R1a-M417 are located in north eastern Ukraine in Dnieper water basin area, which without interruptions has been Baltic populated area, until it got converted to Slavic.


    Slavic languages belong to one of youngest IE branch.
    Baltic languages belong to most oldest IE branch.
    Do the math: Slavic can't be as old as Baltic or even older, so it is...

  9. #109
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    625
    Points
    6,444
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,444, Level: 23
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 106
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by laint View Post
    Sanskrit is constructed language - never been used by any nation or folk as primary language. Sanskrit shares part of vocabulary with living IE languages - the other part is mainly mix of nonIE languages, that were fused into Aryan and Sanskrit is used to identify which are those ancient words, that modern IE languages are still using. 2000BC Sanskrit language grammar have some archaical features, that some of IE languages use, but Sanskrit has never been used by Z93 in Europe nor any other IE people in Europe - it is development of IE in South Asia and compared to proto-IE, even modern Lithuanian is more archaic, even if it lacks some grammar forms still preserved in Sanskrit and other IE languages. Anyway - leave Sanskrit out of this - if you will find how Slavic languages got their vocabulary in Europe, then you will know how Aryan languages got it. IMO, involvement of Aryan languages means also discussing Harrapan, Dravidian, even Elamian and other now vanished language influences, that has to be deconstructed to understand how they sounded before. That is rather very large and unnecessary task for this topic.

    Origin of Slavic people east of Baltic people has never been in consideration.
    There are also no proposals, that Slavic people originated in steppes.

    Spot that is shown as origin of Z93 on map is located exactly over water basin of Oka, that from immemorable times has been inhabited by Baltic tribes. However oldest Z93 are found in more to the east in Sintashta, so map is not correct there.

    Baltic people did not originated in Baltic states, but on Dnieper water basin where they populated this area from earliest times of R1a. Oldest findings of R1a and also oldest findings of R1a-M417 are located in north eastern Ukraine in Dnieper water basin area, which without interruptions has been Baltic populated area, until it got converted to Slavic.


    Slavic languages belong to one of youngest IE branch.
    Baltic languages belong to most oldest IE branch.
    Do the math: Slavic can't be as old as Baltic or even older, so it is...
    Sanskrit (/ˈsænskrɪt/; IAST: saṃskṛta, Sanskrit: संस्कृतम्, also [sə̃skr̩t̪əm]) is a language of ancient India with a documented history of about 3,500 years.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit

    Who and from where 3500 years ago brought Slavic words to India and Sanskrit?

  10. #110
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842
    Points
    10,677
    Level
    31
    Points: 10,677, Level: 31
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 573
    Overall activity: 76.0%


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by laint View Post
    Sanskrit is constructed language - never been used by any nation or folk as primary language. Sanskrit shares part of vocabulary with living IE languages - the other part is mainly mix of nonIE languages, that were fused into Aryan and Sanskrit is used to identify which are those ancient words, that modern IE languages are still using. 2000BC Sanskrit language grammar have some archaical features, that some of IE languages use, but Sanskrit has never been used by Z93 in Europe nor any other IE people in Europe - it is development of IE in South Asia and compared to proto-IE, even modern Lithuanian is more archaic, even if it lacks some grammar forms still preserved in Sanskrit and other IE languages. Anyway - leave Sanskrit out of this - if you will find how Slavic languages got their vocabulary in Europe, then you will know how Aryan languages got it. IMO, involvement of Aryan languages means also discussing Harrapan, Dravidian, even Elamian and other now vanished language influences, that has to be deconstructed to understand how they sounded before. That is rather very large and unnecessary task for this topic.

    Origin of Slavic people east of Baltic people has never been in consideration.
    There are also no proposals, that Slavic people originated in steppes.

    Spot that is shown as origin of Z93 on map is located exactly over water basin of Oka, that from immemorable times has been inhabited by Baltic tribes. However oldest Z93 are found in more to the east in Sintashta, so map is not correct there.

    Baltic people did not originated in Baltic states, but on Dnieper water basin where they populated this area from earliest times of R1a. Oldest findings of R1a and also oldest findings of R1a-M417 are located in north eastern Ukraine in Dnieper water basin area, which without interruptions has been Baltic populated area, until it got converted to Slavic.


    Slavic languages belong to one of youngest IE branch.
    Baltic languages belong to most oldest IE branch.
    Do the math: Slavic can't be as old as Baltic or even older, so it is...
    I think Witzel gave a percentage of words with non-IE etymologies in Rig-Vedic Sanskrit of 3%. That would definitely make it the most IE language.

    Identifiable Baltic isn't older than around 3500 years.

  11. #111
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    17-08-18
    Posts
    49
    Points
    583
    Level
    6
    Points: 583, Level: 6
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 167
    Overall activity: 31.0%


    Country: Madagascar



    Quote Originally Posted by hrvat22 View Post
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit

    Who and from where 3500 years ago brought Slavic words to India and Sanskrit?
    There are no Slavic, nor any other language words in Sanskrit. Roots of those Sanskrit language words can be matched to words in other languages, sometimes only similarities as even roots has to be changed to match those words.

  12. #112
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    17-08-18
    Posts
    49
    Points
    583
    Level
    6
    Points: 583, Level: 6
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 167
    Overall activity: 31.0%


    Country: Madagascar



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    I think Witzel gave a percentage of words with non-IE etymologies in Rig-Vedic Sanskrit of 3%. That would definitely make it the most IE language.

    Identifiable Baltic isn't older than around 3500 years.
    It really depends what texts are compared. The problem there is that we don't know what language was spoken in Indus Valley and which words of that extinct language were similar to IE. Also, IE language that went to India had already influences from others, like Uralic(some of those are calculated as far back as 8000 years), so 97% pure IE vocabulary in Rig-Vedic is rather impossible already.

    That hype about Sanskrit and Rig-Vedic script started in 18th century. The numbers I have about first hymns in Rigvedic - Out of 62 word roots in total, most - 52 were similar to words in Latvian. Lithuanians could compare 38 word roots, English, Greek, Latin and German - 8-12 woord roots. I don't have data about Slavic languages, but most probably - less than in Lithuanian even if most Slavic roots that are found in Sanskrit can also be found in Baltic languages.


    Identifiable compared to what? If people are excited that they think, that Slavic is recorded in Sanskrit, then - Uralic people have some Baltic words from even older than 3500 year old contacts between them and Baltic has been in heartland of IE languages more than others, so 3500 is not really that final age.

    However, let's concentrate on topic about Slavic existence before 600AD and that does not even go so far back in history from that point.

  13. #113
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    625
    Points
    6,444
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,444, Level: 23
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 106
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by laint View Post
    There are no Slavic, nor any other language words in Sanskrit. Roots of those Sanskrit language words can be matched to words in other languages, sometimes only similarities as even roots has to be changed to match those words.
    The striking similarities in Sanskrit and Russian indicate that during some period of history, the speakers of the two languages lived close together.
    https://www.rbth.com/blogs/2014/11/0..._kinship_39451

    http://www.sutrajournal.com/sanskrit...y-james-cooper

    The linguistically proven facts show the amazing affinity of Russian and Sanskritlanguages, obviously pointing out that these two languages must have lived closed together in some periods of antiquity.
    https://1000petals.wordpress.com/201...-and-sanskrit/


    Who and from where 3500 years ago brought Slavic words to India and Sanskrit?

  14. #114
    Junior Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    06-09-16
    Posts
    5
    Points
    2,265
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,265, Level: 13
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 185
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Slovene
    Country: Slovenia



    Hi everybody. Thanks for yourvaluable discussion.
    There are indices that Komarov(or Komarev) people came from Srubna culture. Which at the time, extended up tothe Ural in so called Srubna- Alakulskaya(Andronovo) contact zone. Currently published Muradyim/Kazburun (1890-1750 BCE)haplogroups shows very heterogenous mtdna population with several R1a1a1 Y member,two of those most probably to be R1a-Z280. I found it interesting for geneticancestry specially for population later called “South Slavic”.
    Tomenable,
    Do we have any genetic data forKomarov culture?


  15. #115
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    23-10-17
    Posts
    62
    Points
    1,598
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,598, Level: 11
    Level completed: 16%, Points required for next Level: 252
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Bosnia & Herzegovina



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by laint View Post
    It really depends what texts are compared. The problem there is that we don't know what language was spoken in Indus Valley and which words of that extinct language were similar to IE. Also, IE language that went to India had already influences from others, like Uralic(some of those are calculated as far back as 8000 years), so 97% pure IE vocabulary in Rig-Vedic is rather impossible already.

    That hype about Sanskrit and Rig-Vedic script started in 18th century. The numbers I have about first hymns in Rigvedic - Out of 62 word roots in total, most - 52 were similar to words in Latvian. Lithuanians could compare 38 word roots, English, Greek, Latin and German - 8-12 woord roots. I don't have data about Slavic languages, but most probably - less than in Lithuanian even if most Slavic roots that are found in Sanskrit can also be found in Baltic languages.


    Identifiable compared to what? If people are excited that they think, that Slavic is recorded in Sanskrit, then - Uralic people have some Baltic words from even older than 3500 year old contacts between them and Baltic has been in heartland of IE languages more than others, so 3500 is not really that final age.

    However, let's concentrate on topic about Slavic existence before 600AD and that does not even go so far back in history from that point.
    Kortlandt:
    I assume that Balto-Slavic splitted into three branches: West Baltic, East Baltic and Slavic
    What it means? It means that early proto-Slavic existed in 2000 BC together with proto-east Baltic and proto-West Baltic. What it means further? That proto-Baltic in general never existedy which is confirmed also by words of linguist Rick Derksen:

    I am not convinced that it is justified to reconstruct the proto-Baltic stage. The term "proto-Baltic" is used for convenience's sake.
    It means that Baltic is not older than Slavic, all human languages are really equal old. The thing that Baltic is more "archaic" than Slavic is of different matter. Baltic is more archaic than Slavic (and in general than all IE languages except Greek) phonologically. It is called "word final syllables" and it is famous Greek and Baltic "-as" at the end of word and it is lost in Slavic languages. On the other side, Slavic is more archaic than Baltic in verbal system. For example, in Baltic languages (both Prussian and Letto-Lithuanian) there is no differentiation between 3rd. singular and 3rd. plural. For example, in English is:

    "He writes", "They write". In Baltic languages: "He writes", "They writes". 3rd. singular and 3rd plural are always the same, and in this segment Slavic is more archaic.

    In short, there was Balto-Slavs, until the Slavs in 1500 BC splitted according to glottochronology (perhaps with Komarov culture), and those who left were later called Balts. So, it is not wrong to say that Balts are basically just conglomerate of non-Slavic speaking Balto-Slavs.

    Nomenclature is irrelevant here, if you go by nomenclature in linguistics, proto-Baltic should be in the end proto-Indo-European, and of course, Balts don't have much to do with ancient cultural space of proto IE (including Yamnaya culture), but the reconstruction of "their" proto-laguage, will lead us directly to Yamnaya.

  16. #116
    Enfant Terrible Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience Points
    Wonomyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-17
    Posts
    462
    Points
    890
    Level
    7
    Points: 890, Level: 7
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 60
    Overall activity: 35.0%


    Country: Croatia



    There are seven Croatian personal names recorded in the 10th century work "De administrando imperio". It is believed that the names are of non-Slavic origin. However some think that the names are actualy Baltic.

    According to the legend preserved in the work, they [Croats] were led by five brothers Κλουκας (Kloukas), Λόβελος (Lobelos), Κοσέντζης (Kosentzis), Μουχλώ (Mouchlo), Χρωβάτος (Chrobatos), and two sisters Τουγά (Touga) and Βουγά (Bouga),[10][11]
    (...)
    The origin of the names of five brothers and two sisters are a matter of dispute. They are often considered to be of non-Slavic origin,[31] and genuine names, as the anonymous Slavic narrator (probably a Croat) couldn't invent the non-Slavic names of their ancestors in the 9th century.[144] J.J.
    (...)
    Mikkola considered them to be of Turkic origin,[145][146] Vladimir Košćak of possible Iranian-Alanic origin,[147] while Alemko Gluhak saw parallels in Slavic Old Prussian and Baltic languages.[148] Henri Grégoire rejected Turkic origin, and related them to Slavic place names which previously were part of White Croatia,[149] while Josip Modestin connected their names to toponyms from Lika, where early Croats settled.[150] According to Gluhak, names Kloukas, Lobelos, Kosentzes and possibly Mouchlo don't seem to be part of Scythian or Alanic name directory.[151]
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin..._of_the_Croats

    Other medieval Croatian names are typical Slavic.

    It is worth noting that the most common Croatian R1a subclade is R1a-Z280 (CTS1211).
    Neopisivo

  17. #117
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-05-18
    Posts
    59
    Points
    907
    Level
    7
    Points: 907, Level: 7
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 43
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Wonomyro View Post
    There are seven Croatian personal names recorded in the 10th century work "De administrando imperio". It is believed that the names are of non-Slavic origin. However some think that the names are actualy Baltic.
    Baltic unity about names is also questionable, in the same meaning as the west and east baltic languages itself. Most of basical words are different, names for plants, rivers and other things are very different. The same thing is with names, IMHO. I think, if you research West Baltic (recorded) names, and compare it with East Baltic (Letto-Lithuanian), i think you would not find even 1 same name. This group is not like others (Germanic, Slavic, Romance). The Baltic group is very specific group. Some scholars see them as two separated branches.

    "The Baltic languages are generally thought to form a single family with two branches, Eastern and Western. However, these two branches are sometimes classified as independent branches of Balto-Slavic."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_languages#Branches

    Hammarstorm Harald classified West and East Baltic as separate branches of Balto-Slavic.

    It is worth noting that the most common Croatian R1a subclade is R1a-Z280 (CTS1211).
    Indeed. It was perhaps the main haplogroup among the Proto-Slavs.

  18. #118
    Enfant Terrible Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience Points
    Wonomyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-17
    Posts
    462
    Points
    890
    Level
    7
    Points: 890, Level: 7
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 60
    Overall activity: 35.0%


    Country: Croatia



    The legend is probably recycled a much older folk tale. The names of characters suggest that Croats might have been speakers of an extinct Balto-Slavic dialect before they started to speak Slavic.

    Contemporary 9th century names of the rulers suggest Germanic influences (Suffix -mir).

    IMO, The language shift to Slavic could have occurred in Ukraine (Cherniakov zone).

    Notes by A. Gluhak on the names mentioned in the legend:

    Κλουκας (Kloukas)

    (...) several Prussian and Latvian personal names and toponyms with root *klauk-, which relates to sound-writing verbs *klukati (peck) and *klokotati (gurgle).

    Λόβελος (Lobelos)

    (...) many Baltic personal names with root *lab- and *lob- e.g. Labelle, Labulis, Labal, Lobal, which derive from *lab- (good) or lobas (bays, ravine, valley)

    Κοσέντζης (Kosentzis)

    (...) also noted Baltic names with root *kas- which probably derives from kàsti (dig), and Thracian Kossintes, Cosintos, Cositon

    Μουχλώ (Mouchlo)

    (...) noted Lithuanian muklus and Latvian muka which refer to the mud and marshes, and Prussian names e.g. Mokil, Mokyne

    Τουγά (Touga)

    (...) noted Old Norse-Germanic *touga (fog, darkness), which meaning wouldn't be much different from other names with Baltic derivation.

    Βουγά (Bouga)

    (...) noted Proto-Slavic word *buga which in Slavic languages mean "swamp" like places, and the river Bug itself derive from.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Croats

  19. #119
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-05-18
    Posts
    59
    Points
    907
    Level
    7
    Points: 907, Level: 7
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 43
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Wonomyro View Post
    The legend is probably recycled a much older folk tale. The names of characters suggest that Croats might have been speakers of an extinct Balto-Slavic dialect before they started to speak Slavic.

    Contemporary 9th century names of the rulers suggest Germanic influences (Suffix -mir).

    IMO, The language shift to Slavic could have occurred in Ukraine (Cherniakov zone).

    Notes by A. Gluhak on the names mentioned in the legend:

    Κλουκας (Kloukas)

    (...) several Prussian and Latvian personal names and toponyms with root *klauk-, which relates to sound-writing verbs *klukati (peck) and *klokotati (gurgle).

    Λόβελος (Lobelos)

    (...) many Baltic personal names with root *lab- and *lob- e.g. Labelle, Labulis, Labal, Lobal, which derive from *lab- (good) or lobas (bays, ravine, valley)

    Κοσέντζης (Kosentzis)

    (...) also noted Baltic names with root *kas- which probably derives from kàsti (dig), and Thracian Kossintes, Cosintos, Cositon

    Μουχλώ (Mouchlo)

    (...) noted Lithuanian muklus and Latvian muka which refer to the mud and marshes, and Prussian names e.g. Mokil, Mokyne

    Τουγά (Touga)

    (...) noted Old Norse-Germanic *touga (fog, darkness), which meaning wouldn't be much different from other names with Baltic derivation.

    Βουγά (Bouga)

    (...) noted Proto-Slavic word *buga which in Slavic languages mean "swamp" like places, and the river Bug itself derive from.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Croats
    It is questionable how reliable are this sources. (Proto) Slavic language itself lost word final sylablles ("-as", "os", "-is") under the influence of Srubnaya culture (Timber-grave culture), which was, most likely, Indo-Iranian culture. This culture, mostly probably, influenced pre-Slavic (or early proto-Slavic) culture complex called Chernoles-Komarov. And those cultures existed about 18th century BC until 12th century BC. Much more earlier than the Croats as a tribe existed. So this: Kloukas, Lobelos, Kosentzis is very questionable.

    Κλουκας (Kloukas)
    By the way, by some kind of logic, what about Slavic word "kljucati", or "kljukati". And, yes, in Lithuanian is not "klokotati", but "kliukseti".

    So why the candidates for etymology are so much Baltic words, when so much Slavic words are in option; klokotati, kljucati, kljukati... etc...

    noted Proto-Slavic word *buga which in Slavic languages mean "swamp" like places, and the river Bug itself derive from.
    Bug river is from old Germanic "baug-s" which meant something winding or bent. Slavs adopted the word Baug from the Goths, who previously lived in large numbers near the river.

  20. #120
    Enfant Terrible Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience Points
    Wonomyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-17
    Posts
    462
    Points
    890
    Level
    7
    Points: 890, Level: 7
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 60
    Overall activity: 35.0%


    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Srbadija View Post
    It is questionable how reliable are this sources. (Proto) Slavic language itself lost word final sylablles ("-as", "os", "-is") under the influence of Srubnaya culture (Timber-grave culture), which was, most likely, Indo-Iranian culture. This culture, mostly probably, influenced pre-Slavic (or early proto-Slavic) culture complex called Chernoles-Komarov. And those cultures existed about 18th century BC until 12th century BC. Much more earlier than the Croats as a tribe existed. So this: Kloukas, Lobelos, Kosentzis is very questionable.
    Many formerly Baltic teritories became Slavic since around 500 AD.
    Quote Originally Posted by Srbadija View Post
    By the way, by some kind of logic, what about Slavic word "kljucati", or "kljukati". And, yes, in Lithuanian is not "klokotati", but "kliukseti". So why the candidates for etymology are so much Baltic words, when so much Slavic words are in option; klokotati, kljucati, kljukati... etc...
    "Klokotati" is actualy a modern Croatian word (onomatopoeia). There is another modern Slavic (Czech) word - "kluk" (boy).
    Quote Originally Posted by Srbadija View Post
    Bug river is from old Germanic "baug-s" which meant something winding or bent. Slavs adopted the word Baug from the Goths, who previously lived in large numbers near the river.
    Touga could be related to another river Daugava.

  21. #121
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-05-18
    Posts
    59
    Points
    907
    Level
    7
    Points: 907, Level: 7
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 43
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Wonomyro View Post
    Many formerly Baltic teritories became
    According to Baltic hydronyms described by Toporov and Ivanov? Those toponyms are still "horse in vacuum", nothing more. Why not include Slavs in those archaic hydronyms?

    For example, you have "Jelgava" city in Latvia. Also, you have river "Jihlava" in Czechia. So, if Toporov (for example) didn't know that Slavs lived there (In Czechia), how would he classified river "Jihlava"??? I guess it would be today classified as "Baltic hydronym" as all in Eastern Europe which ends in "-ava", "-eva"... etc... The question is why? Why not drag Slavs into this hydronyms?

    For example, see this text:

    "Fully sharing the opinion of Rassadin about Prague culture as the first archeological manifestation of the Slavic ethnos itself, as well as about its Kiev origins, it is necessary to consider the preceding Venetian ethnos of the carriers of the Late Zarubine and Kiev cultures as Slavic, and not Balto-Slavic. The ethnogenesis of the Western Balts, a well-documented chain of archaeological cultures (the Mazury-Warmian group of the Lusatia culture — the culture of the Western Baltic kurgans — the rich culture and the related groups of soil burials — the commonness of the caged ceramics), did not have a relationship. Moreover, the formation of the Eastern Balts (Lithuanians and Latvians) can be explained by the impulse from the cultures of perched ceramics. [17] Thus, all cultures that have continuity with cultures of historical Balts of the XIII century. (Kurshey, Zemgals, Latgals, Zhemayts, Lithuania, Yatvyagov, etc.), are derived directly from the culture of the Western Baltic kurgans that originated in the 1st millennium BC. under the influence of common fields of burial urns. Those cultures that are not derived from it, there is no reason to consider the Baltic cultures - contrary to the concept of the “Dnieper Balts”, which is still widespread among archaeologists. The only basis for it is the similarity of hydronymy at the site of these cultures with the Baltic one, but an alternative explanation has already been proposed for it above. hitherto widespread among archaeologists. The only basis for it is the similarity of hydronymy at the site of these cultures with the Baltic one, but an alternative explanation has already been proposed for it above.


    If the undifferentiated Balto-Slavic unity ever existed (with which not all linguists agree), then the Lusatian culture seems to be the best match for it, and the beginning of its disintegration corresponds to the isolation of the Pomorian and Mazury-Warmian groups of this culture.In this case, the ethnonym "Veneta" at an early stage of its existence could relate to ancestors not only of the Slavs, but also of the Balts. "


  22. #122
    Regular Member Achievements:
    250 Experience PointsThree Friends1 year registered
    Lenab's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-12-17
    Posts
    711

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I S24 Saxon
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H Pioneers

    Country: United Kingdom



    Goths were Eastern Germanic that's Baltid

  23. #123
    Regular Member Achievements:
    250 Experience PointsThree Friends1 year registered
    Lenab's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-12-17
    Posts
    711

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I S24 Saxon
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H Pioneers

    Country: United Kingdom



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWlYP4eOZ40 Do Germans have some Slavic descent??? UNTOLD SLAVIC HISTORY


  24. #124
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-05-18
    Posts
    59
    Points
    907
    Level
    7
    Points: 907, Level: 7
    Level completed: 79%, Points required for next Level: 43
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Lenab View Post
    Goths were Eastern Germanic that's Baltid
    So what? Goths were Goths. They were Germanic (mainly).

  25. #125
    Regular Member Achievements:
    250 Experience PointsThree Friends1 year registered
    Lenab's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-12-17
    Posts
    711

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I S24 Saxon
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H Pioneers

    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by Srbadija View Post
    So what? Goths were Goths. They were Germanic (mainly).
    So they had integrated with Slavs to make them East Germanic please watch the video the original Germans were North like Saxons Vikings etc

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 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
  •