What I am trying to say is, genetic heritage will correspond with linguistic heritage as has been the case countless times. I hope the ROUA data comes out soon.
Kazimierz Dobrowolski speculated that the mountaineers of the Beskides mountains had a Balkan input. This is how he visualized it:
His linguistic evidence from what I can find is strictly based on toponyms.
He spends pages on explaining why Beskid cannot be explained in any other language than Albanian. Then he provides some other examples:
Almost all these examples are Albanian only with the exception of magula and gropa. Magula is closer to the Albanian version than Romanian. So Romanians could not have brought these terms(since they don;t have most of them in their ongue), but neither could have the Albanians, otherwise Albanian haplogroups(Albanian sub-branches) would be present in these populations. The answer is simple, a Dacian population survived until late middle ages, after which it became fully Slavophone. Their original homeland was likely Marmurres or Bukovina.
The event that triggered their full conversion to a Slavic identity is likely the Mongol invasions, their brutal raids must have weakened the ancestral Hutsul population, the Vlach took advantage of the situation and expanded northwards, forcing some of the Hutsuls to migrate towards Poland-Slovakia-Czech republic, where they fused with Slavs and the pursuing Vlachs forming the Gorales.
Kazimierz Dobrowolski spends pages on the toponym of beskides(can't read Polish), but that toponym is actually a Hutsul word with the same meaning as Albanian bjeshk.
Hutsuls speak Slavic, but a very bad Slavic. As a non-Slavic speaker I easily notice it. And they have a strong Dacian substrate (proably 15-20% of their vocab). We will see more on that later.
