Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Çabej points out that villages in the Balkans are generally of recent date and changeable settlement. Hence for the study of toponyms city names and rivers are best. If we inspect such names attested by ancient sources, we find that many follow Albanian phonological development: Scardus > Shar, with no metathesis, as in Scardona > Skradin. Scodra > Shkodër; Çabej remarks that sk- > h- belonged to the pre-Balkan period, and compares (VII Congresso internazionale 244), for phonology, shkamb < scamnum and kulshedër < chersydrus. (Rogame is a recent suffixation in -ame of rëge, and therefore no problem because of the medial -g-.) Barbanna > Buenë is regular, as shown by Jokl (IF 1932: 50.33 ff.), Slavia (1934-1935:13.286 ff.), Glotta (1936:25.121 B.). Lissus > Lesh (cf. missa > meshë, etc.); Çabej points out (VII Congresso intemazionale 245) that Latin + CC is regular, a statement I can neither affirm nor control at the moment. Dyrrachium > Durrës, Isamnus > Ishm, Drivastum > Drisht show, as Krahe claims, the Illyrian initial accent. Shkum(b)î < Scampinus is regular in the Central Albanian dialect, where pretonic ë > u and mb > m are expectable (VII Congresso internazionale 246). Aulwn > Vlorë may perhaps involve a Slavic intermediary. Thyamis > Çamëria, as Leake saw in 1814, is accepted by Çabej; however, one might expect s < t(cf. pus 'well' < Lat. puteus). Arachthos > Arta is supposedly better explained by Albanian than by Greek; but, apart from the surprising syncope, kt should yield ft or jt, and not t, from that time level. Ragusium (Ragusa) is Rush in Bogdan (1685).
Most Albanian-Rumanian correspondences come from borrowings by Vulgar Latin (as precursor of Rumanian) in Dardania from an Illyrian substrate. Then, we suppose, pre-Rumanian moved north of the Danube and merged with a Daco-Romance dialect, which contained Thracian elements showing correspondences with Armenian (allegedly a sound shift, and certain affixes dealt with in Rom. Jb. 9; for details, see below).
Albanian toponyms known from antiquity do not show Albanian phonological development. That should not be surprising; from the end of the tenth century the whole of southern Albania was overrun by Bulgarians. But that does not necessarily mean that there were no Albanians anywhere in Albania.
Old loans in Rumanian from Albanian and shared Albanian-Rumanian developments from Latin point to an eastern origin. But the nomadic habits of the Vlachs and the herding culture of the Albanians would have brought them into contact for perhaps long periods in the past. Moreover, granting that the Albanians may well have had eastern contacts, we still do not know exactly where the Illyrian-Thracian line was, and NaissoV (Nish) is regarded by many as Illyrian territory.
From these observations Cimochowski concludes only that the south of Albania, the north around Shkodër, and the Adriatic seacoast are excluded as earlier Albanian territory; but this does not prove a Thracian relationship. There then follows a long discussion of the evidence for an Illyrian relationship, which will be taken up in part below, after which Cimochowski concludes, with Stadtmüller, that the home of the Albanians was somewhere in the vicinity of the Mat, stretching to Nish.
It has long been recognized that there are two treatments of Latin loans in Albanian. Bari sets forth (LS 27-28, and Godinjak, Balkanoloki Institut, Sarajevo 1.1-16 [1957], esp. 7-11) a very convincing looking solution for this duality. Latin ct, cs gives Albanian ft, f(luftë 'war', kofshë 'thigh'), which matches Rumanian lupt, coaps; these would easily represent sound substitutions after IE *kt had become *t. (One problem I see in this is ftua 'quince' < cotónum, which would have to have become *ct- almost immediately to avoid falling in with këta 'this [n.], these [m.]'.) This group also includes Albanian traftr < tract-. On the other hand, we have in derjt 'straight' < d(i)rectus and trajtonj a different outcome, which matches Old Dalmatian traita < tract-. Similarly, there are both Albanian a and e as reflexes of Latin a, which match Rumanian and Dalmatian developments. These, then, would look back to two chronological and geographical layers, one an "inner Balkan" and the other a "coastal Adriatic." Bari(Godinjak 13) considers that since Rumanian has loans from Albanian, but Albanian has practically none in the opposite direction, these Rumanian shapes must all be "Restwörter," not "Lehnwörter"; but, as Reichenkron (above) takes into account, the loan situation may easily be more complex than this.
The dialectal split into Gheg and Tosk happened sometime after the region become Christianized in the fourth century AD; Christian Latin loanwords show Tosk rhotacism, such as Tosk murgu "monk" (Geg mungu) from Lat. monachus."
The Greek and Latin loans have undergone most of the far-reaching phonological changes which have so altered the shape of inherited words while Slavic and Turkish words do not show those changes. Thus Albanian must have acquired much of its present form by the time Slavs entered into Balkans in the fifth and sixth centuries AD"
The isogloss is clear in all dialects I have studied, which embrace nearly all types possible. It must be relatively old, that is, dating back into the post-Roman first millennium. As a guess, it seems possible that this isogloss reflects a spread of the speech area, after the settlement of the Albanians in roughly their present location, so that the speech area straddled the Jireček Line.
Ah ok, i got it, Smerd style (!), but please tell me how can Smerd and Matzinger establish with sufficient precision the chronological phonetic development of g* >*dz >*d > dh, i.e. how do they know that in the II century BC the local 'Illyrian' pronounce it as *z/dz instead of *d !?
How do they know that the proto-romanians heard it as *dz and not *d !?
How can they explain the coexistence of Messapian Barzidihi and Bardulos (refering to a color!):
Bardylis: (Diodorus , Book XVI, chap. 4 , § 3) , or 'Bardyllis ' (Plutarch , Pyrrhus, chap . 9) is related to the word 'bardulos' meaning grey in the Messapian language.
???
How can they explain the term Bardocucullus which originated in Illyria!?
How do they know that every 'Illyrian' name with the root 'bard' means beard/bearded (while there exist whatsover no reference to such etymology !!) !?
We are all capable to speculate, but we need facts not fancy theories!!
Do not mention me the hypocrisy, you confused the 'adress'!
I repeat my question:
How do they know that the proto-romanians heard it as *dz and not *d !?
This is not a reply:
Romanian Barza from Albanian Bardhë
Romanian Zala from Albanian Dhallë
Even the Turks used both Bard and Barz for the Albanian name/word Bardh, while they hear it for the first time after the XIV century !!
How can you explain it !?
No one has a clue how proto-Albanians pronuonced the modern word/name Bardhe in the V century AD (when likely the proto Romanians took it), also how can you explain the two versions Vjedulle/Vjedhulle which was adopted as Viezure in Romanian/Vlach !?
You literally have not addressed a single point I brought up. How in good conscience does someone perform detailed linguistic analysis on an exonym?
It's like me trying to analyze where the word "Austria" comes from. "Oh, it ends in -ia, that must be an Eastern Latin place. I think "Aust" is related to the "Austerity""
Nevermind that the locals call it "Osterreich". But yeah, let's perform letter-by-letter analysis on a butchered exonym.
Completely agree. I get the same impression, that they're basically using the same logic as nationalistic Balkan YouTube commenters. I think studying Albanian in itself and it's relation to say Latin, Aromanian, Greek or even Slavic is way more useful than comparing it to some dubious reconstructed Illyrian language.
The suffix -um happens in many Albanian words actually as does the suffix -on. It is something that is actually typical in Albanian when expressing something in plural form. Suffix -um is actually a typical trait of Albanian at least in terms of plural form. We also have the suffix of -e . The suffix of -ai which possible turned to -aj.
There is also the suffix of -os which in Albanian has turned possibly into -osh.
This is something that I am pretty sure can also be lost in a language since based on my time learning Italian I noticed the structure of Albanian has been influenced by Latin. These type of suffixes are also easier lost than what Noel Malcolm claims which I quoted above which he claims is not as easy lost.
While -um were also typical of Illyrian place names they do not happen in all Illyrian place names some actually follow typical modern Albanian suffixes.
The dozzen of Illyrian place names explained in the Albanian language can also not be ignored.
But I have to admit it was a good observation made by Matzinger.
Do not mention me the hypocrisy, you confused the 'adress'!
I repeat my question:
How do they know that the proto-romanians heard it as *dz and not *d !?
This is not a reply:
Romanian Barza from Albanian Bardhë
Romanian Zala from Albanian Dhallë
Even the Turks used both Bard and Barz for the Albanian name/word Bardh, while they hear it for the first time after the XIV century !!
How can you explain it !?
No one has a clue how proto-Albanians pronuonced the modern word/name Bardhe in the V century AD (when likely the proto Romanians took it), also how can you explain the two versions Vjedulle/Vjedhulle which was adopted as Viezure in Romanian/Vlach !?
How other linages like V13 and PF7563 fit in this puzzle and what their linguistic implications are, is yet to be determined me thinks. This coming paper with samples from Macedonia, Albania, Montenegro etc will most definitely shed some light.
For the hundredth time. It is not about the "um" suffix, but about the reflex of the syllabic resonants: /r̩/ /l̩/ /m̩/ /n̩/
In Albanian, /n̩/ gave /a/ for example: Indo European. *mn̩ti- gave Albanian. Mati whereas in Illyrian, this would be Munti.
Matzinger never supported the Bessi hypothesis, so you guys probably haven't even read his work but other people's misinterpretations.
This thread has been viewed 620789 times.