|
Post by Novus Dis on Sept 29, 2008 10:01:28 GMT -5
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Sept 29, 2008 10:09:08 GMT -5
plttthhhh you Sky-nthian Iranian
|
|
|
Post by Novus Dis on Sept 29, 2008 10:29:41 GMT -5
plttthhhh you Sky-nthian Iranian Slavonic culture/language and Iranian culture/language share no similarities.
|
|
|
Post by Duke John on Sept 29, 2008 10:37:36 GMT -5
plttthhhh you Sky-nthian Iranian Slavonic culture/language and Iranian culture/language share no similarities. So how do you really connect Azeri and Albanian language? where you see the similarities? Azeri belongs to Altaic languages while Albanian belongs to IE languages, they are totally different in structures! Azeri is part of Turkish languages! and you are using words like STRIKING? lmao... learn some basic thing before you make your self look like budalo!
|
|
|
Post by kapetan on Sept 29, 2008 10:37:52 GMT -5
plttthhhh you Sky-nthian Iranian Slavonic culture/language and Iranian culture/language share no similarities. That doesn't mean anything when it comes to the origin of a people^ iranian peoples refers to iranian speaking peoples, just like slavic speaking peoples and germanic speaking peoples. doesnt mean they have the exact same culture. although there is simmilarities. OBVIOSLY NOT WITH TODAYS iranian groups though. we know the slavs had their Avar "overlords" they could've easily assimilated with the slavs in the Poland area and kept their name fact still is first place serbs are mentioned is there, so its still a good possibility.
|
|
|
Post by Novus Dis on Sept 29, 2008 10:50:54 GMT -5
So how do you really connect Azeri and Albanian language? where you see the similarities? Azeri belongs to Altaic languages while Albanian belongs to IE languages, they are totally different in structures! Azeri is part of Turkish languages! and you are using words like STRIKING? lmao... learn some basic thing before you make your self look like budalo! Check the alphabets of the two languages. I don't have time at the moment to compare every single letter. That doesn't mean anything when it comes to the origin of a people^ iranian peoples refers to iranian speaking peoples, just like slavic speaking peoples and germanic speaking peoples. doesnt mean they have the exact same culture. although there is simmilarities. OBVIOSLY NOT WITH TODAYS iranian groups though. we know the slavs had their Avar "overlords" they could've easily assimilated with the slavs in the Poland area and kept their name fact still is first place serbs are mentioned is there, so its still a good possibility. Where is your proof?
|
|
|
Post by chalkedon on Sept 29, 2008 11:09:34 GMT -5
Well... that would explain why the term " turk-albanian " was used so often in Greece ;D
* jumps in foxhole *
|
|
|
Post by kapetan on Sept 29, 2008 13:22:20 GMT -5
So how do you really connect Azeri and Albanian language? where you see the similarities? Azeri belongs to Altaic languages while Albanian belongs to IE languages, they are totally different in structures! Azeri is part of Turkish languages! and you are using words like STRIKING? lmao... learn some basic thing before you make your self look like budalo! Check the alphabets of the two languages. I don't have time at the moment to compare every single letter. That doesn't mean anything when it comes to the origin of a people^ iranian peoples refers to iranian speaking peoples, just like slavic speaking peoples and germanic speaking peoples. doesnt mean they have the exact same culture. although there is simmilarities. OBVIOSLY NOT WITH TODAYS iranian groups though. we know the slavs had their Avar "overlords" they could've easily assimilated with the slavs in the Poland area and kept their name fact still is first place serbs are mentioned is there, so its still a good possibility. Where is your proof? I dont have solid proof..if there was it would be case closed know what i mean? But reality is so far there is no solid proof about most balkan people not just serbs.. its all theories. but yes it is fact serboi or whatever the name of the tribe was is first mentioned there in caucases
|
|
|
Post by vinjak on Sept 29, 2008 17:46:25 GMT -5
Albanians = Azerbaijanis.
So thats where they came from Huh well it does make sense over that Illyrian nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Sept 29, 2008 18:46:46 GMT -5
Lol, such amazing stupidity. The Azeri language and Albanian language have about as much affinity as Chinese and French. Modern Azeri is a Turkic Ural-Altaic language while Albanian is an Indo-European language associated with Paleo-Balkan languages such as Thracian or Illyrian. The pre-Turkic Azeri language being either a Caucasian language, related to other such Caucas languages as Chechen or, if Armenians are correct, related to Armenian, or possibly even Iranian. If the latter is so then it is possible since Albanian and Armenian share very old affinities. I dont know enugh about th region to make any comment, although Armenians seem to argue that church inscriptions in the region are Armenian... I dont know.
PS: In both the Caucasus and in the Balkans, the term 'Albania' is entirely etic and derived from Latin word 'white', and the suffix 'ia' meaning 'land', Albania is also found as the name for Scotland and for Alba Longa. In fact, in Lazio today there is an area called Albina. Its outside imposed. We do not know what the old people in the area called themselves, both there is little doubt in my mind that it wasnt 'Albania'.
|
|
|
Post by srbobran on Sept 29, 2008 20:45:23 GMT -5
You just proved our point. Since the term: Albanian means white and can be found all over the world, than the "Albani" tribe probably has nothing to do with today's Albania, after all you are Shqips not Albanians.
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Sept 29, 2008 21:42:39 GMT -5
The dumbest argument Ive ever heard. By such account, it makes no sense why everyone calls Greeks Greeks instead of Hellenes. And how much sense does it make if the people called Albani who live in the same area where today's Albanians live are not related... Thats like saying one + one is zero. There is no concrete proof the 'Albani' of Ptolomey called themselves such also.
|
|
|
Post by Duke John on Sept 30, 2008 1:25:06 GMT -5
LMAO! Alphabets??? lol, nemas veze!
|
|
SuperAlbanian
Amicus
King of Gays
20%
CANARIS IS THE REAL KING OF GAYS! OH WAIT! HES THE QUEEN OF GAYS!!!!
Posts: 1,283
|
Post by SuperAlbanian on Sept 30, 2008 11:20:56 GMT -5
I love something about Serbs.... It has to be their propoganda! No better exporter than the Serbs my friend! Well done!
|
|
|
Post by Teuta1975 on Sept 30, 2008 11:46:32 GMT -5
It seems someone is determined to finding the roots and the origin of Albanians. It is nice to see such an effort (especially when is made by Serbs); what struck me is the starting point: "Albanians are not Illyrians"? And someone here comes up with a totally strange language, pretending there are similarities (that I fail to notice). Would the person who opened the thread be as kind as to bring some evidences (linguistic) to prove what he/she claims? I am not against Albanians coming from Azerbaijanis; it is only that it may also be the truth that long time ago (prehistorically if the word applies for Serbs), were Illyrians who may have come from Azerbaijanis rather than Albanians, and any rudiment of Albanian and Azerbaijanis may as well be a new scientific connection point of Allbanians and Illyrians not as a lost language (Illyrian), but as an evolving one into Albanian. It may also explain the total "loss" of Illyrian language (that is not Serbian ) as an evolving process into the structure of a language so strangely "lost" to nowhere. My belief is that Illyrians didn't loose the language because it used to be rich enough as to trade and communicate in Adriatic and carry over conversations with Rome. Therefore, again, I would be more obliged if someone brought more affinities of Albanian with Azerbaijanis language. It'll be the discover of the century since Albanian language so far doesn't seem to have any brunch to belong to; and linguistic rules hold that languages that have no brunch are as old as those who are part of a family tree, with the only exception that these small languages proved survival.
|
|