Vladimir Georgiev on the origins of the Albanian language

[Arta]

Soviet linguist Vladimir Georgiev on the origins of the Albanian language

Vladimir Georgiev (The Slavonic and East European Review 44, no. 103, 1960, pp. 285-297)

VIII. Albanians and Rumanians

Whether the Albanians are the successors of die Illyrians or the Thracians is a problem that has long been debated. Today the Albanians dwell in a region that was known in antiquity as Illyria. For that reason the Albanians have often been regarded as the heirs of the ancient Illyrians. In the same way, the Bulgarians might be considered as Thracians if the other Slavonic peoples and languages were not known.

But many linguists and historians, e.g. H. Hirt, V. Pârvan, Th. Capidan, A. Philippide, N. Jokl, G. Weigand, P. Skok, D. Detschew, H. Baric', I. Siadbei, etc. have put forward very important considerations indicating that the Albanians cannot be autochthonous in the Albania of today, that their original home was the eastern part of Mysia Superior or approximately Dardania and Dacia Mediterranea, i.e. the northern central zone of the Balkan Peninsula, and part of Dacia.

Now, however, when it is clear that Daco-Mysian and Thracian represent two different IE languages, the problem of the origin of the Albanian language and the Albanians themselves appears in quite a new light. The most important facts and considerations for determining the origin and original home of the Albanians are the following.

1. The Illyrian toponyms known from antiquity, e.g. Shköder from the ancient Scodra (Livius), Tomor from Tomarus (Strabo, Pliny, etc.), have not been directly inherited in Albanian: the contemporary forms of these names do not correspond to the phonetic laws of Albanian. The same also applies to the ancient toponyms of Latin origin in this region.

2. The most ancient loanwords from Latin in Albanian have the phonetic form of eastern Balkan Latin, i.e. of proto-Rumanian, and not of western Balkan Latin, i.e. of old Dalmatian Latin. Albanian, therefore, did not take its borrowings from Vulgar Latin as spoken in Illyria.

3. The Adriatic coast was not part of the primitive home of the Albanians, because the maritime terminology of Albanian is not their own, but is borrowed from different languages.

4. Another indication against local Albanian origin is the insignificant number of ancient Greek loanwords in Albanian. If the primitive home of the Albanians had been Albania itself, then the Albanian language would have to have many more ancient Greek loanwords.

5. The Albanians are not mentioned before the 9th century a.d., although place names and personal names from the whole region of Albania are attested in numerous documents from the 4th century onwards.

6. The old home of the Albanians must have been near to that of the proto-Rumanians. The oldest Latin elements in Albanian come from proto-Rumanian, i.e. eastern Balkan Latin, and not from Dalmatian, western Balkan Latin that was spoken in Illyria. Cf. the phonetic development of the following words:

Vulgar Latin caballum 'horse' Rum. cal, Alb. kal
Vulgar Latin cubitum 'elbow' Rum. cot. Alb. kut
Vulgar Latin lucta 'struggle, fight' Rum. lupt, Arum. luft, Alb. luftë

Therefore Albanian did not take shape in Illyria. The agreement in the treatment of Latin words in Rumanian and in Albanian shows that Albanian developed from the 4th till the 6th century in a region where proto-Rumanian was formed.

7. Rumanian possesses about a hundred words which have their correspondences only in Albanian. The form of these Rumanian words is so peculiar (e.g. Rum. mazre = Alb. modhullë 'pea(s)') that they cannot be explained as borrowings from Albanian. This is the Dacian substratum in Rumanian, whereas the Albanian correspondences are inherited from Dacian.

The above arguments are well known, but they have not been regarded as sufficient for a definitive solution of the problem. The most important fact to be revealed has been the separation of Daco-Mysian from Thracian. It has thus been established that the phonemic system of Albanian is descended directly from the Daco-Mysian.

Let us consider some examples. The most typical features of the historical phonology of Albanian are attested in Daco-Mysian. Besides, in Daco-Mysian there also appear the intermediate phonetic changes that explain the peculiar phonetic development of Albanian. Here are some samples:

IE Daco-Mysian Albanian
e ie je
() > > o o
> o o
> ö > e e
> ü y, i
ew e e
aw a a
ri ri
a a

Examples:

IE e > D.-M. ie:
a Dacian tribe is named , but a Thracian one .
Dacian PN Diegis from IE dhegwwh-.
Dacian river name from IE *erðs-.
Dacian word dielina 'Bilsenkraut' from IE *dhel-.

IE > D.-M. > > o:
IE *dhw > D.-M. dva > dva > dova, cf. Pulpudeva (4th century b.c.), Buridava (1st century a.d.), Pelendova (after the 4th century a.d.).

IE > oi > ö > e:
Salmor-ude 'Salt Water', a salt lake in Scythia Minor, in Greek called 'Salt (Lake)' and in Latin palus Salameir; Dacian ude from IE *udo(r) 'water'.
(2nd century a.d.) > Pelendova (after the 4th century a.d.) from *pl-m *dhew 'Stutt-gart', cf. Alb. pelë 'mare'.

IE > oi (= ü) > ü (i):
, Moesi, Mysi.

In this way it has been definitively proved that Albanian is descended from Daco-Mysian. Therefore the primitive home of Albanian is a Daco-Mysian region, probably Mysia Superior (Dardania, Dacia Mediterranea) or western Dacia. This fact enables us to explain the numerous typical agreements between Albanian and Rumanian.

Rumanian and Albanian took shape in the Daco-Mysian region;

Rumanian represents a completely Romanised Daco-Mysian and Albanian a semi-Romanised Daco-Mysian.

[Zeus10]

3. The Adriatic coast was not part of the primitive home of the Albanians, because the maritime terminology of Albanian is not their own, but is borrowed from different languages.

It is almost impossible to find in Albanian maritime terminology words other than Albanian origin.
The Georgiev "study", is totally based on assumpions different from the truth. Reading his conclusion, the only conclussion you can get to is : "Georgiev doesn't have any knowledge of Albanian language, he just poses himself to".
Let's consider most of his conclussions trashes, and ignore them.

[jay_albania_fan]

Here is my response which I also posted on albanian.com:

Albanian is native to its area. This much we know. Since very few words exist in Illyrian, Thracian, or Dacian, nothing can be said about any relationships beyond that they were Indo-European languages. We can't even assume that there was one Illyrian or one Thracian language. Illyria covered a large geographic area and the various tribes did not all speak the same language (or dialect). What evidence there is points to Albanian descending from some Illyrian dialect as Dacia and Thrace were too far geographically and there is no known movements of Dacians or Thracians into Illyria. It is also just as likely that Illyrian, Dacian, and Thracian formed some form of dialect continuum.

With regards to Albanian and Romanian, it is more likely that the Latin speakers who would inhabit Dacia were not the Latin speakers of the original settlers (as initially the Romans were not in Dacia long), but Latin speakers from Illyria who settled into Dacia later. This is why Romanian and Albanian seem to share some words. Most of Romanian dialect diversity is outside of Romania.

So the Illyrian speakers of southern/mountainous Illyria kept their language which became Albanian while the northern Illyrians started to speaker Latin and they settled in Dacia and probably reinforced what Latin was there as well as supplanted Dacian. Later, did Slavs settle in northern Illyria and displace Latin and Illyrian.