donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Mar 31, 2012 10:42:59 GMT -5
Which are these?
I gave you one; Bushtrica!
You haven't understood what I said. The pre-shift loans I mentioned are also evident in toponyms, including Bushtrica which is a Slav placename, for a local river (it basically means swift, clear river in Slav). I didn't say Bistrica is a pre-Slav toponym, quite the opposite. What I said is that south Slavs pronounced it differently before the 9th century AD, smth in the line of Bystrica. Because our ancestors have preserved the form Bushtrica, it means our ancestors were in contact with the Slavs who named the river before the 9th century AD, contradicting the theory that we arrived in the Balkans in the 1000s or 1100s.
This is sth well etablished among professional linguists, including Russian linguist Vladimir Orel.
|
|
|
Post by realitydysfunction on Mar 31, 2012 11:09:40 GMT -5
I hope you didn't overlook my attached doc file. I think there is a lot of material there that hasn't been posted around much. It all comes from peer-reviewed publications and there's investigation approaches from various angles. The following is just a short excerpt. SLAVIC HISTORICAL LINGUISTICSKortlandt, Frederik. Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics, suppl. Selected Writings on Slavic and General Linguistics 39 (2011): 2.2. PIE *s was retracted to *s after % *u, *r and *k in Balto-Slavic, Albanian, Armenian and Indo- Iranian. This development remained subphonemic until the spirantization of *c < PIE *k (see 5.8 below). 2.3. The PIE palatovelars were depalatalized before résonants unless the latter were followed by a front vowel, e.g. OCS slovo 'word', Gr. ??, but Lith. klausyti £to listen'. This development was common to Balto-Slavic and Albanian. As for what you are calling "non-IE elements" in Albanian I have yet to see anything from you, something concrete besides the suggestion itself. Admittedly, Albanian language has a lot of word borrowings from Turkic/Persian from the time when the Ottomans were playing Empire in the Balkans (14th to 20th century). Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by groet on Mar 31, 2012 11:38:25 GMT -5
Why didnt the same happen when Romans, Goths and others invaded? They're not comparable. With the Romans there never was a demographic invasion, Romans only took administrative control, and therefore did not push Albanians/ancestors away. However, a good proportion of the native population did adopt Latin, and those who lived in the isolated mountains were more likely to survive assimilation. We do see that there was a large Latin population in the lowlands, and in the highlands as well, Vlachs living the pastoral life like Albanians. These Latins lived mainly in the urban settings. The Goths and the others only invaded but never really took control, and while there was a Gothic etc. demographic invasion that probably settled it never was large enough. As far as I know there actually is some small linguistic proof of that Gothic invasion, Albanian gomar 'donkey' comes from Gothic I've read. The Slavic invasion was large and at a time when disease had been rampant in the Balkans, we also see today that there are large Slavic populations in the Balkans as remnants of the initial invasions. Basically, the Slavs invaded and settled there, unlike the Romans, but also managed to take administrative control, unlike Goths f. e but not unlike Romans. So the Slavs must have been able to put more pressure on the pre-Slavic populations. We can also see that Slavs have gained their current territorial control gradually as they have pushed us down further south. The first record of Albanians is at exactly 1000 A.D., a Bulgarian document refers to the Arbanasi as half-believers, being Catholic and Christian but not Orthodox. There's no document speaking of Albanians migrating from the mountains afaik.
|
|
paul
New Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by paul on Mar 31, 2012 23:23:06 GMT -5
shejtani/ I have read many books, there are many different opinions thats why im here but still being treated with suspicion like ive come to rob your house! Is civilised discussion between Albanian and nonalbanian not common here or am i paying for someone elses insults to Albanians? If you dont want to discuss then dont involve yourself in the discussion but enough with the accusations ive already wasted to much time responded to such.
donnie/
Not including late Serbian settlement in Vojvodina there were many Slavs in the past living on both banks of the Danube especially round the time when these Slav loans entered Albanian language pre sound change.
Anymore? Ok can you show the part of Orel about Bistrica because i want to see how the sound "u" was the original sound kept in Albanian.
Reality Dysfunction/ I havent overlooked just that there are many to read, your right there is lot of good material there just that it is all over the place and taking lot of time to read.
That talks about Albanian similarities with Slavic and Baltic but doesnt say anything bout Illyrian.
I didnt say it does i said it could, Greek is a old balkan language and it does.
groet/
Is there sources talking bout how large Slav groups were? If the disease your talking bout is Justinians Plague then that lasted for couple hundred years and wasnt just in the balkans. Isnt that same with Romans and Romanians?
Many Romans settled there and were born there, the way they invaded is different than Slavs for sure but still dont think it can be denied that many settled there mostly in cities and were given lands and regions to control.
How you think they got the administrative control and how did they create, and is there any sources that talk about local balkan population resisting the new control?
Thats strange because Orthodox Catholic split didnt happen till 1054. Do you have exact quote or just what you got from the internet?
|
|
|
Post by groet on Apr 1, 2012 6:35:49 GMT -5
Is there sources talking bout how large Slav groups were? If the disease your talking bout is Justinians Plague then that lasted for couple hundred years and wasnt just in the balkans. It didn't happen in the Balkans only, but the Balkans were hit hard by the Bubonic plague. It's commonly known that plagues like these weakens the population and makes it easier for invaders to invade and settle. The Slavs had quite large numbers when they came, I don't have any sources myself, but I remember numbers going up to mentions of 100 000 invading. Looking at the quick expansion going all the way down to Greece, that shouldn't be unrealistic. Romanians are assimilated natives who assimilated under the pressure of an administrative entity that never invaded the Balkans in the same sense Slavs did. It's still not comparable, empires like the Roman or Ottoman empire rarely make any demographic invasions because they absorb rather than expand in this sense. A few landowners here and there aren't worth mentioning, the reason for Latin populations in the Balkans is assimilation; Spaniards, the French, Portuguese etc. are not the result of Latin migrations out of Italy, they're the result of locals adopting Latin. They created states and empires which are administrative entities, so they gained control over territory and people. I don't have any documents referring to resistance against the invading population, but it's pretty obvious that there must have been. The Schism was only an official split, the two separate churches had existed before that. The document: albanianhistory.net/texts15/AH1000.html
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Apr 1, 2012 6:48:59 GMT -5
Hey Paul, I think we've been quite accommodating and generous, taking time and effort to present why the theories concerning our Illyrian or Thracian origins are the most plausible. Perhaps it's your turn to do the same, present your ideas on why you're a sceptic or at least present the reasons/evidence for considering an extra-Balkanian origin of our language.
|
|
paul
New Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by paul on Apr 1, 2012 8:56:04 GMT -5
shejtani/ Arent you able to reply like normal person? Ive been nothing but respectful here show the same even if dont agree with me theres no need to be rude.
groet/
Yes i have seen the same numbers but not the source, if you see the source again put it here if you can.
Why is it that different to Slavs if they only had 100000 people? For sure there was much more people in the balkans when they came. How many Romans you think settled in the balkans?
I dont agree, the Ottoman empire left several of thousands of Turks in the balkans and other places, not all balkan Turks are assimilated locals.
I think there wouldve been some mostly in cities but not much anywhere else otherwise there would be documents referring to big resistance. Most battles were with Roman army because thats the administration they were fighting against and not with local people in villages and towns imo.
Thanks for that link Groet, i know that two seperate churches existed before but wasnt sure if they identify as Catholic and Orthodox before 1054.
donnie/
A few like you have been decent and helpful but the other few have been rude and useless, this is normal discussion not accomodation or generosity i want only to learn more about Albanian views and nobody has to respond if they dont want to. I see little Thraco Albanian connection and think if balkan connection is possible it is Illyrian but the problem is small evidence and only some traces, im trying to learn more from the links Reality Dysfunction gave about Illyrian language characteristics. I cant say much till i learn more but would rather know what im talking about and make some sense than give blind opinion without knowing anything like some people.
|
|
|
Post by groet on Apr 1, 2012 10:19:02 GMT -5
100 000 invadors is a very large number for an invading force, and this was only one wave out of several. What's most important is that Slavs gained control as is clearly evident today. I doubt there were many Romans settling in the Balkans, maybe some soldiers, administrators and such, but the Romans usually gave locals such positions. Roman-Illyrian relations seem to have been based on Romans giving the different tribes autonomy to live as they had lived before as long as they gave something back to the Romans (soldiers f. e.), not very different to Ottoman-Albanian relations actually. The number of Turks isn't even that large in the Balkans, and in most cases they're more likely to be more related to locals than Turks. Furthermore, the Turks who moved into the Balkans were not Ottoman Turks, you had different Turk tribes who moved into the Balkans independently of the Ottomans. I think you're grossly exaggerating the contribution Turks had to human capital in the Balkans, or you think a few Turks here and there are worth mentioning. The Slavic invaders would have fought against the Romans, but it wouldn't have stopped them from plundering, killing, raping etc., that would have pushed the local population. And it's clear that if a large group of people invades into a territory it will damage the equilibrium. The site you used earlier agrees with what I said. "Manuscripts unanimously agree to the fact that the Slavic army was incredibly cruel: they killed peasants, burned villages, pillaged towns. That does not really correspond to the descriptions of the Slavic character found in Tacitus's works and works by Greek authors written several centuries before. This makes us suppose that the Slavs actually were accompanied by remnants of nomadic steppe nations which had lived in Europe before. This supposition is surely true for the period after 560, when Avars joined Slavs in their invasions to the Empire. " indoeuro.bizland.com/project/chron/chron5.html
|
|
|
Post by realitydysfunction on Apr 1, 2012 12:28:29 GMT -5
|
|
paul
New Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by paul on Apr 2, 2012 6:20:41 GMT -5
Reality Dysfunction/
How many Turks you think settled in Albania?
groet/
I know there was more then one wave but how do you know how much in each? I doubt threre was 100000 each time or even close to that number for the others because where did they all suddenly come from and where were before?
Which sources say Illyrians have autonomy under Romans? Im not sure if this is same like Ottomans because only muslim Albanians were give special powers because they convert in big numbers. How many Turks you think settled the balkans?
It doesnt make difference if you compare to Slav, Albanian and Greek.
Im not exaggerating i havent even said how much they were.
You think Slavs and locals didnt assimilate each other as well in many places?
How many mansucripts say the Slavs killed peasants and burned villages?
|
|
|
Post by groet on Apr 2, 2012 7:52:27 GMT -5
I don't know how much there were, and I wasn't saying each wave consisted of an equal number. However, it's pretty clear that these several waves must have contributed a large part. Several Illyrian tribes did have autonomy under Romans, as I said in return for autonomy they sent soldiery and tributes. Muslims weren't the only ones who had similar deals where they gave gendarmes in return for autonomy and such, actually, in many cases Muslims wouldn't really have had to do that. It has nothing to do with the numbers in which they converted btw, Muslims had certain rights no matter how many of their peers were Muslims. I don't remember sources, but it's pretty clear that the Romans wouldn't have subdued the isolated tribes, and even from a linguistic point there seems to be evidence. You have words like kuvend in Albanian meaning 'convention, assembly' which comes from Latin, and it seems like these kuvends were assemblies where Albanian tribes would travel down from the mountains and meet with their Roman superiors. I have no idea, it's very hard to give answers for questions like these. RD showed an excerpt above which mentions that Turks settled Bulgaria, Macedonia and Thracia for the most part, however not all of them are Anatolian settlers. What I'm trying to say is that those Turkic tribes had more in common with the Barbarian invaders than the Romans or the Ottomans in that they were small invading groups and not an invading empire. You did say there were several thousands of Turks settling and you did insinuate that the Turks must have had a large effect on the demographics of the Balkans. I think it's pretty clear that if there's a large invading force, slaughtering, plundering etc. then they would be the ones in the power position to assimilate the locals and not the other way around. I think you'll have to take that up with the source I linked.
|
|
|
Post by ralphtpika on Apr 2, 2012 8:13:12 GMT -5
How many Turks you think settled in Albania? How many do you think? Whats your opinion? I think there were a few, but what do you think? Do you think? It seems youre great at asking questions but not giving much in return? Which sources say they didnt? I think the serbs were the turks chosen people as they gave them plenty of their daughters to fill Ottoman harems, can you please prove otherwise, show me manuscripts to contradict these claims You tell me you seem to have evidence at hand, please share. Why not, serbs and greeks smell funny, like a finger of a person whom has an itchy ass as they sleep. Do you itch your ass? Why, and if not prove it? I know youre not exaggerating, youre not saying much, just acting like a kid asking, Why? Prove it? I doubt it so please present some manuscripts or stone carvings to back what you say. How many say they didnt? How many manuscripts do you have saying serbs were good people? Present them.... Paul can you answer any of these questions with solid proof?
|
|
paul
New Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by paul on Apr 2, 2012 9:31:30 GMT -5
groet/ I dont think they were much more than 200000 for the whole of balkans so not close to the number of locals but there administration must have been strong. I dont know many sources that say numbers for invaders.
Which tribes and when did this happen?
Which christian Albanian tribes had that kind of deal with the Ottomans? Kuvend looks like it comes from Latin but dont know about the story of Albanian tribes meeting Roman superiors being connected to it, where did you read that from?
Ok but still they didnt just invade the Ottoman empire they were helped and settled by Ottoman Turks like refugees.
Even 20000 is several there would be more than that much Turks settled in all balkans through 400/500 years imo.
With the language yes but i cant see millions of locals assimilated in the culture of couple of hundred thousand Slavs because Slavs never have powerful kingdom in 6th century to do this. Ok but you did say it agrees with what you said.
ralphtpika/
I dont know exact number but atm i dont think it would be that different to rest of balkans that is why i asked. How many do you think? Is something wrong with asking people to support their opinion?
What do you want in return? I have given my opinions when people ask so go back and read.
Thats not how this works this isnt children school.
Thats just childish and wrong who cares if most of your people converted to invading religion im just telling fact and not saying as an insult, cultures change nobody is pure.
I dont want to know bout your gay fantasy bout Serbs and Greeks.
Yes im asking that because i want clarification on some peoples claims and if you cant answer questions and dont want to discuss as mature person then create a finger ass topic and be busy there you sick person your a shame to Albanians and other balkans people.
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on Apr 2, 2012 16:33:57 GMT -5
I dont think they were much more than 200000 for the whole of balkans so not close to the number of locals but there administration must have been strong. I dont know many sources that say numbers for invaders. do you have any sources? what evidence of that do you have? where did you access that information? what proof do we have of that and why are you so certain? who can corraborate that clam? where did you get hold of the actual manuscript? is there any eye witnesses that can attest to that claim? do you have any footage of that? who is that author and what did he say? what was his motive for making that claim? how do i gain access to those archives? where do babies come from? is the world flat? what is the meaning of life? what is that mechanical whirring noise in my head, could it be the sound of my brain coming to terms with it stupidity?
|
|
paul
New Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by paul on Apr 3, 2012 7:15:34 GMT -5
Each question was more stupid than the one before, make way for normal people to enter discussion.
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on Apr 3, 2012 8:09:53 GMT -5
Each question was more stupid than the one before, make way for normal people to enter discussion. i think my compatriots exceeded every conceivable stretch of kindness in indulging your insufferable mediocrity and its time for you to fuck right off
|
|
|
Post by uz on Apr 3, 2012 17:15:00 GMT -5
Yea, cause you're just that fucking useless, your thoughts/ideas/comments on anything here is a waste of space and distracting from the real content.
Do as you say, and leave the real shit to your compatriots.
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on Apr 3, 2012 17:23:40 GMT -5
u know what your problem is uz? you can't reverse that lobotomy procedure, your personality is a fucking opiate, everytime you talk you cure insomnia.
|
|
|
Post by uz on Apr 3, 2012 17:49:09 GMT -5
you've used that personality equals the cure for insomina insult already, I guess the contraceptive joke would've been too early uh... get your ass back online and research better shit to sprew before you get sued for copyright infrigement.
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on Apr 4, 2012 15:11:10 GMT -5
uz no one gives a shit about you, no one cares give it up, you're an anonymous figure in here, stop trying to be relevant
|
|