Paleo-Balkan & Balto-Slavic - Common Proto Language

[Delodephius]

Here is an example of a full declination of the word 'yoke' in Sanskrit, Slavonic, Latin and Greek.

Sanskrit - Slavonic - Latin - Greek
sg.
N,V,A yugam - iǐgo - iugum - ζυγόν
G. yugasya - iǐga - iugī - ζυγοῦ
D. yugāya - iǐgu - iugō - ζυγῷ
Abl. yugāt - (iǐga) - iugā - /
L. yuge - iǐgæ - (iugā) - /
I. yugena - iǐgomǐ - (iugā) - /
du.
N,V,A. yuge - iǐgæ - / - ζυγώ
G,L yugayoḥ - iǐgu - / - ζυγοῖν
D,I,Abl. yugābhyām - iǐgoma - / - ζυγοῖν
pl.
N,V,A. yugā - iǐga - iuga - ζυγά
G. yugānām - iǐgǔ - iugōrum - ζυγῶν
D. yugebhyaḥ - iǐgomǔ - iugīs - ζυγοῖς
Abl. yugebhyaḥ - (iǐgomǔ) - iugīs - /
L. yugeṣu - iǐgæxǔ - (iugīs) - /
I. yugaiḥ - iǐgy - (iugīs) - /

The forms in brackets are taken from other cases that have replaced the function of the previous case. For example, the function of Ablative has been absorbed by Genitive or Dative in Slavonic, or Locative and Instrumental by Ablative in Latin.

[Delodephius]

Well based on my knowledge of Old Slavonic I theorize that cases in Macedonian would be something like this:

sg. masculine
N. grad / Branko
G. grada / Branka
D. gradu / Branku
A. grad / Branka
L. gradje/grada* / Branku
I. gradom / Brankom
*(depending on the dialectical evolution of ě)

pl.
N. gradi
G. grad/gradov
D. gradom
A. gradi
V. gradi
L. gradih/gradoh
I. grad(a)mi

sg. feminine
N. žena
G. žene
D. ženi
A. ženu
V. ženo
L. žene/žena
I. ženom

pl.
N. žene
G. žen(a)
D. ženam
A. žene
V. žene
L. ženah
I. žen(a)mi

[Soldier of Macedon]

SoM, I have started making a table of all nominal case endings in all IE languages. Once I'm done I'll convert it into a PDF file and post it here. I don't know how long it will take, but I already see many similarities between different languages. For example, the case endings in neuter are almost the same in OCS and Sanskrit.

That would be good reference material Slovak, I look forward to it. I have been looking into Macedonian case endings over the last few weeks and how they have been replaced by the definitive article suffix, here is what I have compiled so far - let me know if there are any which are incorrect:

Nominative Case (names) - Branko, Petar, Andon, etc, they can either end in a vowel or consonant

Vocative Case (brat) - Bratu, Brate, Bato, Bate, Batka, Batko, Bratko, Bratchko

Locative Case (city) - Vo Soluna Grada, Prilepa Grada, etc, these are more common in archaic speech or song but still used today, although in most cases it has been replaced by the literary standard with a definitive article suffix that has 3 positions, ie; Gradot/ov/on Prilep/Solun.

Genitive Case (branko) - Kreni zname brankovo, Jordan Brankov (patronym and surname), Brankovo (village name), Ene go deteto na/od Branka**

**The last example uses a preposition, and with nouns other than names the post-definitive article comes into place. Therefore, if we use the noun 'brat' instead of 'branko', it would be - Ene go deteto na brato(t). I have placed the 't' in brackets because many Macedonians drop this letter at the end of words with definitive article suffixes, which actually makes it sound closer to the cases which they replaced.

Dative Case (friend, branko) - Kai prijatelo(t), prijatelo(v), prijatelo(n), all of which use the definitive article suffix instead of the dative case, but with a name for the noun, one could say Kai Branka.

Accusative Case (jovan) - Go znam Jovana, bev so Jovana (?)

Like I said, I am not sure they are all correct, if you spot anything that isn't, let me know.

[Delodephius]

SoM, I have started making a table of all nominal case endings in all IE languages. Once I'm done I'll convert it into a PDF file and post it here. I don't know how long it will take, but I already see many similarities between different languages. For example, the case endings in neuter are almost the same in OCS and Sanskrit.

[Delodephius]

Yes, I know about Turkic and Uralic languages, but these are less suffixed than Slavic or Baltic languages (Macedonian and Bulgarian not included) or such old languages like Sanskrit or Avestan.

Only some modern IE languages use prefix/article type grammar, mostly Western European and Indo-Iranian. Old IE languages plus modern Slavic and Baltic languages were heavily suffixed (inflected is a better term). Old English, Old Norse, Gothic, Ancient Greek, Latin, Avestan, Old Persian, Sanskrit, Pali, Hittite, Tocharian, Old Church Slavonic, Classical Armenian, etc. these were all heavily inflected languages. Didn't you know that? The switch to prefix/article grammar is quite common in linguistics.

[Onur]

That's not true. All Indo-European languages were heavily suffixed. Slavic and Baltic languages are still so. It was a common stage in their development, not a thing in Latin specifically.

The preference over articles/prefixes to suffixes or vice versa cant be a stage in the development of languages. It`s one of the main characters which defines the family of languages. So, people usually doesn't give up using suffixes and start to use articles/prefixes. It stays as it is and develops according to it. If a switch between article/prefix and suffix occurs(this is an extreme case in the world of linguistics), then this is sign of heavy interaction and possibly a fusion of two different language in one stage of it`s history.

As far as i know Latin has more suffixes than other IE languages. At least i am sure about English and French. Also, i am talking about heavy suffix usage in terms of IE family of languages since IE system is based on prefixes and article usage. If you wanna see what is the real heavy suffix usage, you can see that in Finnish, Hungarian, Turkish etc.


Also, you could at least google about Etruscan influence in Roman before saying ""no"!.

[Delodephius]

It`s widely believed that the heavy suffix usage in Latin is the result of the influence from Etruscan language.

That's not true. All Indo-European languages were heavily suffixed. Slavic and Baltic languages are still so. It was a common stage in their development, not a thing in Latin specifically.

[Onur]

I haven't heard of a relationship between Celtic and Latin. I also don't know if the Iberian languages were Celtic . I was under the impression that Latin was the language the romance languages originate from without much non Latin input.

On the contrary, Latin was largely derived from other languages. For example, what we call as "Latin script" today, is actually the Etruscan script except only 3-4 letters which itself related with Greek script. Also large part of Latin vocabulary comes from Etruscan and ancient Greek languages. Etruscan wasn't even an Indo-European but an agglutinative language. It`s widely believed that the heavy suffix usage in Latin is the result of the influence from Etruscan language. Already, none of the languages in the world develops by on its own. All of them gets effected from each other by various degree, some more and some less.


Btw, Celts had settlements in central Anatolia too. They came from Balkans and there are several tombs and castles in Turkey today which remained from the galatians, celts. AFAIK, they eventually assimilated among various peoples of Anatolia and disappeared after Roman rule.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Here is a suggestion on how PIE may have branched out at different phases. Initially, Proto Anatolian marked the first departure from PIE, and after that the centum sound-shift emerged, which marked the second departure, this time from Proto Italo-Celtic. That left Proto Balkan-Slavic-Baltic-Aryan which underwent the satem sound-change some time later, and marked the last departure from PIE. In areas where centum and satem reflexes were present in neighbouring languages, it is likely that they competed. So, at this point, the following exist:

- Proto Anatolian Group
- Proto Italo-Celto Group
- Proto Balto-Slavic-Balkan-Aryan Group

I will leave aside Anatolian from here. As it was still in the early phases, the different groups would still be sharing significant similarities, so it is possible that Proto Germanic, for example, came about as a result of a hybrid between Proto Italo-Celtic and Proto Balto-Slavic-Balkan-Aryan, or it may have just branched off from one of the previous groups and then had intense interaction with other languages during the early period immediately after. Proto Hellenic and Proto Armenian may also be considered in a similar way, or perhaps they themselves formed Proto Armeno-Hellenic which belongs to the list above (but this would mean that Armenian was once centum and now satem). Either way, at this point there were probably:

- Proto Italic
- Proto Celtic
- Proto Hellenic
- Proto Armenian
- Proto Balto-Slavic-Balkan
- Proto Aryan (Indo-Iranian)
- Proto Germanic

At some point afterwards those groups split into the IE sub-families know today, but there was still yet another language to come about, and that is Proto Albanian, which must have derived its core IE vocabulary from a combination of two or more of the above groups.

This is just a suggestion but it seems to make sense.

[Delodephius]

Well, the Continental Celtic languages are similar to Italic languages, but not so much the Insular Celtic (Irish, Scottish, Welsh) and some scholars insist they are two separate language groups, calling the first simply Celtic or Italo-Celtic, and the other Brythonic or simply British.
Germanic languages however show more similarity with Balto-Slavic than Celtic.

[osiris]

Thank u Slovak couldn't similar comparisons be made between Slavic and German or Greek or even Latin. I thought the Celtic Latin link was a theory only. What about Celtic and German . All indo European languages have similarities but I would have thought the Thracian Slavic one is more obvious than the italo Celtic one. I will have a look T the link thanks again.

[Delodephius]

Osiris, here are some examples of how similar Latin and Gaulish were:

http://www.orbilat.com/Encyclopaedia/G/Gaulish_language.html

Gaulish - Latin - English
-cue - -que - and
es - ex - out of
are - ante - before
ver - super - over
allos - alius - second
tarvos - taurus- bull
tri - tres, tria - three
more - mare - sea
rix - rex - king

Also:

http://indoeuro.bizland.com/tree/celt/gaulish.html

Celtic peoples were called different names: Gauls in France, Belgae in Northern France, Galates in the Balkans and numerous tribal names everywhere. But there is no doubt that they all spoke one language, or similar varieties of the same one. This comes from town names, inscriptions and Celtic words written down by Greek and Roman authors. Their language system is what is called "Classical Celtic": it was very close to the Italic group of tongues, and Julius Caesar even had to write his letters to his legates in Greek for Gaulish leaders not to be able to read them if they might happen to gain hold of these missives. He did so because Latin could be understood by Celts quite well without having had to study it.

[osiris]

I'm not an expert son. But I haven't heard of a relationship between Celtic and Latin. I also don't know if the Iberian languages were Celtic . I was under the impression that Latin was the language the romance languages originate from without much non Latin input.

[Soldier of Macedon]

........we only need to look at spain portugal and france to see how completely unrelated ancient languages were replaced by latin.

Osiris, that is not exactly correct. In Gaul and Iberia the Celtic languages became a substratum that was dominated by Latin, much like what took place with the Paleo-Balkan languages and the more dominant Common Slavic. However, in both cases, the local and intrusive languages were related more to each other than to other IE languages. When Proto Indo-European began to branch out, it did so in phases. So, for arguments sake, initially there would have been something like a Proto Anatolian, Proto Italo-Celtic, Proto Balto-Balkan-Slavic-Aryan, etc, then there would be Proto Italic, Proto Celtic, Proto Balto-Balkan-Slavic, Proto Indo-Aryan, etc.

It is important to keep in mind that Celtic languages have historically existed on both sides of the Danube, and alongside Paleo-Balkan languages such as Thracian and Illyrian. This co-existence produced hybrid tribes such as the 'Scordisci', who were part Celtic and part Illyrian; the same could have happened in some areas of Dacia. It can therefore be deduced that Vulgar Latin remained dominant mainly in Dacia (present-day Romania) as a result of pre-existing commonalities with the local Celtic language(s). The same, however, could be argued in support of the historical presence of Slavic-speaking peoples in the same region, as a result of pre-existing commonalities between Dacian/Thracian and Common Slavic.

[osiris]

the most interesting and yet disturbing thing i have heard is that there are many thracian inscriptions locked away in greek and bulgarian museums. what a pity its politics that determies what should be seen and heard and not a sincere search for historical truth.

the fact the inscriptions are unavailable makes me think they would destroy much of the neo greek german origin view of the past. i am of the same view as som and slovak and believe the thracian languages were related those we know call slavic.

when referring to rumanian lest not forget modern rumanian is a language cleansed of over half of its 19th century vocabulary. there is no doubt that whats left is latin but it doesnt mean the original langauge of dacia was latin we only need to look at spain portugal and france to see how completely unrelated ancient languages were replaced by latin.

latin was a language spoken widely throughout the balkans for more than 500 years and a version of it still is by vlachs and rumanians.

i have also heard it said that macedonian may be referred to as a latin language with a slavic vocabulary because of the "latin" nature of macedonian grammar.

this would also support the view that macedonian is an indigenous balkan language and not one introduced to the balkans after the demise of the roman empire, but it existed as a living local language during the hey day of the roman empire and subsequently influenced the grammar of the language we speak today