Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I imagine very much the same thing : a non-IE substratum + a CWC (probably satem) layer + a centum superstratum. The non-IE substratum could have something to do with the Scandinavian I1 haplogroup (?). CWC were 70.5% R1a (Maciamo's figures) - enough for a link with Balto-Slavic languages. The centum-speakers would have been R1b-U106 (probably not BB proper though).
English have very present the sound they call schwa, as in a cup of tea.to weight the proximity/distance of languages is not so easy, it depends on what you position first: lexicon, structure/syntax, morphology and so on... I found what I consider as evident traces of neo-Celtic syntax in English as well as in Portuguese, spite they are "Germanic" and "Romance". For lexicon, we find everytime a mix of IE cognates and more or less recent so more or less evolved loanwords. Even syntax can be mixed. Anciently close languages can exchange during some time still after separation at the colloquial level, so not only isolated words. This explains the difficulty to elaborate a reliable glottochronology. We can suppose either a proto-satem dialect converging strongly with centum dialect or a proto-satem dialect substratum overrun by a centum one (born by Y-R1b-U106 clans?).
But I prefer the substratum hypothesis to the convergence one.
well achieved Germanic was of course closer to Celtic and Italic than to Indo-Iranic; this doen't exclude an ancient layer of satemic traits.
Taranis could give us his thoughts? (Maybe he got tired by these discussions?)
It is good mention that we see Germanic sound shifts in loanwords from other languages too but these are languages which were spoken in the Middle East, some examples from Semitic:
Semitic root q-n-b "hemp" > proto-Germanic *xanapiz (k>x & b>p) "hemp", compare Arabic qannab and Greek κάνναβις (kánnabos), probably from Sumerian kunibu "hemp".
Semitic root kʷ-l-b "dog, puppy" > Proto-Germanic *xʷelpaz "whelp, puppy" (kʷ>xʷ & b>p), compare Ethiopian kʷähila and Arabic kalb
Semitic root s-r/l-p "silver" > proto-Germanic *silubra "silver" (p>b (Verner's law)), compare Akkadian sarpu and Arabic sarif "silver". (p>f in Arabic)
Semitic root ṣ-b-r "sparrow" > proto-Germanic *sparwo "sparrow" (b>p), compare Akkadian ṣibaru "sparrow"
Semitic root g-l-d "clot" > proto-Germanic *klutto "clot" (g>k & d>t), compare Hebrew root ג ל ד (g-l-d) and Arabic root ج ل ط (j-l-t).
Semitic root k-r-y "hire" > proto-Germanic *xuriyo "hire" (k>x), compare Arabic kiraya "hire, rent"
Semitic root k-l-l "whole" > proto-Germanic *xailo "whole" (k>x), compare Akkadian kalu "whole"
Semitic root d-r-g "track" > proto-Germanic *trako "track" (d>t & g>k), compare Akkadian daraggu "path, track"
Semitic root p-r-q "fright" > proto-Germanic *furxtaz "fright" (p>f & k>x), compare Arabic fariqa "fright"
Semtic root p-r-h "happy" > proto-Germanic *frawaz "happy" (p>f), compare Arabic farah "glad, happy, merry" and German froh and English frolic
Romanian ...pre Latin was/has origins of a Illyrian-thracian mix ( a branch of Italo-celtic ) ............that dh also appears in current and old venetian@mihaitzateo
I 'm not romanian speaking, only I have some booklets at hand, and my old brain.
Can you affirm me the written 'Z' in Romanian is pronounced in IPA as english 'th', voiced ('dh') or unvoiced? I was not aware of this, if true. It's true sometimes the palatalized 'ty' and 'dy' ([tch>ts]/[dj>dz]) can go until a 'th' and 'dh' on the model of english: look at castillan. But in Romanian?
for your 'barza' I found this:
[h=1]barză[/h]
Jump to navigationJump to search[h=2]Contents[/h][h=2]Romanian[edit][/h][h=3]Alternative forms[edit][/h]
[h=3]Etymology[edit][/h]Compare Aromanian bardzu (“white (of horses and mules)”): both it and the Romanian word may derive from Albanian bardhë (“white”), or are akin to it. Alternatively, the Romanian word may derive from a pre-Roman substrate of the Balkans, possibly from or via Dacian, from Proto-Indo-European *bhereg- (“white”).
Another theory, though somewhat unlikely, suggests that its origin is a Vulgar Latin root *gardea, from Latin ardea (compare Spanish garza (“heron”), Portuguese garça, also Frenchbarge (“godwit”)). The confusion of g and b is somewhat unusual, but may be explained as a Balkan influence. Other cases in Romanian include limbă, rug, negură, întreba (compare also Sardinian bula, from Latin gula) [1].
A third proposal is borrowing from a Dacian word meaning "stork", derived from a Proto-Indo-European root *sr̥ǵos, also reflected in e.g. English stork, Ancient Greek [FONT="]πελαργός(pelargós).[2]
[/FONT]
I prefer the first explanation, by very far: but not come directly from Albanian, in my opinion; rather born by 'bardza', from whom could derive and albanian 'bardh' and romanian 'barzä' ('ä' for your atone 'a'); I suppose a possible previous palatalized form in °°'bargja', without any solid ground it's true. According to Taranis the 'th' and 'dh' in Albanian came often from palatalized velar occlusives, if I don't mistake.
Celts in contact with Dacians or Thracians: yes. at late stage of prehistory, but it does not implies they were akin or close one together
What's the connection for Romania when it comes to Illyrians/Thracians?Romanian ...pre Latin was/has origins of a Illyrian-thracian mix ( a branch of Italo-celtic ) ............that dh also appears in current and old venetian
https://www.omniglot.com/writing/venetian.htm
.
so dh is prounced as th ..............my mum origins, is western Veneto and for the number 5 she says thinque , spelt dhinque
my father origins in central veneto for the number 5 says Sinque ( same spelling ) ( s at start of word is prounced as s , an s in the middle of a word is a zed sound )
What's the connection for Romania when it comes to Illyrians/Thracians?
What's the connection for Romania when it comes to Illyrians/Thracians?
Thank you for some reason I clustered in South Romania quite a bit also on my autosomal plotting mapUntil the middle of the second millennium BC, the Proto-Italo-Celto-Illyro-Thraco-Dacian was a single language. After that some phonological change appeared in different dialects of this proto-language. Namely in the dialect from the middle of this group from which evolved the Continental Celtic and the Oscan and Umbrian, the labiovelar (kʷ, gʷ) turned into bi-labials (p, b). The innovations affects all these languages (one should remember that the forefathers of Oscans and Umbrians migrated from the upper Danube valley into the Italian peninsula)
I saw this video on Youtube recently about them. I don't trust a lot of the things this guy says on his other videos but on this one he's pretty on point.Romanians were Dinaric type until recently, they still are,but they granted asylum to the Balkanic Nordoids of Germanic type ,most notably Serbs and Albanians.
If ,for Vlad the Impaler ,a southerner remained a southerner,meaning,regardless of his religion, he would still fight for the Turks, things had changed during Michael the Brave,he was a Basarab,from his father and Seytanoglu's nephew, from his mother.
The Brave was an atipical Wallachian leader,he didn't had that Old Romanian keenness, didn't liked to play 1 against 10,as the men encharged before him,but he had alot of money and more important, a plan,a big one.
His courage was again uncommon blindly,he charged Basta's troops without too many preparations, still,the overall achievements were impressive.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igli_Tare
Romanian ...pre Latin was/has origins of a Illyrian-thracian mix ( a branch of Italo-celtic ) ............that dh also appears in current and old venetian
https://www.omniglot.com/writing/venetian.htm
.
so dh is prounced as th ..............my mum origins, is western Veneto and for the number 5 she says thinque , spelt dhinque
my father origins in central veneto for the number 5 says Sinque ( same spelling ) ( s at start of word is prounced as s , an s in the middle of a word is a zed sound )
Until the middle of the second millennium BC, the Proto-Italo-Celto-Illyro-Thraco-Dacian was a single language. After that some phonological change appeared in different dialects of this proto-language. Namely in the dialect from the middle of this group from which evolved the Continental Celtic and the Oscan and Umbrian, the labiovelar (kʷ, gʷ) turned into bi-labials (p, b). The innovations affects all these languages (one should remember that the forefathers of Oscans and Umbrians migrated from the upper Danube valley into the Italian peninsula)
These comments of "some linguists claim italo-celtic never existed etc etc" is purely based on people who want to justify their own agenda , which is also delving into "fantasy" land and should be treated equally as suspect .............because they have no proof eitherConsidering that P-Celtic is much closer to Q-Celtic ("Continental Celtic" is misleading here, because Brittonic is Insular Celtic, but P-Celtic nonetheless), and and that Osco-Umbrian (*p- is much closer to Latino-Faliscan (*kw-), it's a lot more reasonable to assume that the kw > p change (a very unsurprising and "easy" change, to be honest; it also happened in later IE languages, like Romanian, and earlier in Greek, too) occurred independently after Proto-Celtic and Proto-Italic split into different dialects/languages, probably as late as the Iron Age (the fact that Celtic languages with "insular" characteristics vary between "/p/ and /kw/ also suggest that).
Besides, AFAIK there is virtually no linguistic evidence at all that Italic, Celtic, Illyrian and Thracian were ever part of the same language. Of course early IE languages formed a dialect continuuum without clear-cut boundaries between one and the other, but I have never read any renowned linguist claiming that Thracian or Illyrian bear a much stronger phylogenetic relationship with Italo-Celtic, in fact there are even some linguists who claim the Italo-Celtic branch is a stretch and that an Italo-Celtic language never existed, rather they could've been related languages spoken close to each other and forming a Sprachbund. What are the sources or linguistic evidences you have read presenting the likelihood of a Italo-Celto-Illyro-Thraco-Dacian language? Not even genetically (Y-DNA haplogroup distributions, e.g.), that common language seems to make sense in my opinion.
This thread has been viewed 29379 times.