Talk:Proto-Indo-European to Dacian sound changes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A request: more citations of the literature as well as citations of the primary material, to avoid original research which is not allowed in Wikipedia.Alexander 007 11:40, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I cannot understand your point: Each link that I made in the article is a "citation" please count how many I added (and I still need to add). Seems that you have more doubts on my postings despite the fact that what was written before (quoting Sorin Paliga etc...) on the Dacian language was "pseudo-science". My article its the first "normal" one on the Dacian Language (sorry to tell you) with citations (mainly to Leiden - that is the most serious IE School today in the world) on almost every posted word. But we can decide of course to remove it, if is not needed. I wanted to help (mainly my country) with my posting when I read what stupidities are written there before about Dacian. Please not that I posted only the 'most obvious' etymologies so that ones taht are about 9x% the right one => see that I avoided to post Decebalus' etymology for instance. What I'm afraid here is that there are people that cannot validate well what is right or wrong on this area : for example the Old Greek loans in Albanian shows that Albanian arrived in almost their today area 'at least' around 300 BCE so the Albanians cannot be the Carps. However their is a section on the Dacian language that assert this. MariusA 00:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't assert anything about the Carpi being ancestors of Albanians (unless you are referrring to that image, but even there a caption is placed noting it is hypothetical). It mentions the possibility, which was advanced by Dacologists in the past. I will ask Bogdangiusca for his source. I'm not sure if linguists agree about the date of those Old Greek loans in Albanian. There are not many, and Hamp, for example, was not dogmatic about them being proof of Albanian settlement near ancient Greece. Alexander 007 01:57, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I am not a linguist and I cannot verify everything you post, though I recognize most of the etymologies you have posted thus far (the etymology for Akmonia, Aizisis, Dawa, Maluensis, etc.). But when I request secondary sources, that is exactly what I mean. Citing a published linguistic source specifying reconstructed forms, etc., is preferable (for example, the 'dz' being present in Aizisis). You are mostly linking the PIE base forms, cognates, attestation, etc. There was much that was incorrect in the other material, most of the fault going back to the souces, and not the Wikipedia editors. The stuff about the Albanians being possibly descended from Carps, for example, goes back to Bogdangiusca---but he took this from Russu or something. Now whether Paliga is not scientific enough to be quoted---I'm not sure. I know he is unorthodox. But in the Dacology field, there are many like him: Harvey E. Mayer is more pseudo-scientific than Paliga for example. I don't want you to get angry when I request verification; you are improving Wikipedia's Dacian language information, but try to avoid original research. An example of an etymology that is not that obvious and needs a source is Tamasidava (I don't disagree with the etymology, it just needs a source; not just PIE roots and cognates). Alexander 007 00:57, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Look at the ==References== section: it is barren. More secondary sources, journals, etc., will need to be placed there. The article now is on the one hand very technical and apparently well-done, but it hardly has secondary sources cited for the various sound-changes, reconstructed forms, etc. You don't just work from Pokorny and Demiraj right? So you should have secondary sources as well; read the Wikipedia:No original research policy. A problem with Wikipedia is that if linguist B has done better work than linguist A, but linguist A is published and linguist B is not, then Wikipedia will have to settle for linguist A. Alexander 007 01:20, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

0. "apparently 'well-done'?" why 'apparently?' Is quite well done :) ...and I'm not a person that 'take me seriously'. 1. Tamasidava is quoted by Parvan and Tomaschek etc...if 'you don't know the source' doesn't alway means that 'there are no sources'... 2. The PIE root and The Cognates + the Phonetical Rules to be applied systematically : these are the most valuable sources. Based on what 'source' :) you exclude them? 3. Wikipedia:No original research policy => NONE of that etymologies are 'my etymologies' there 4. Please compare my article if other ones before to consider it 'not sourced' (I put the links not to write each of the sources) 5. I didn't talk about the number of Greek loan in Albanian I talked about the phonetic rules Latin a: > Albanian a; Old Grek a: -> Albanian o => based on this: Albanians arrived in Greek vicinity 'later' but 'before' the Roman arrival in Balkans....so they cannot be the Carps. 6. Pokorny and Demniraj 'are enough' as 'Wikipedia sources': 'Right?' However you can find others by cliking on that links 7. I'm upset that after 2 days that I spent from my time => I need to justify myself => especially when is not the case--MariusA 03:07, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, continue the good work Marius :-) Even if you might include some original research here & there, I think your work is very reliable. I agree with you about the Carps and my personal view on Albanians is that they split from the Northern Dacians before the Romans began their conquests in the Balkans. I do not however support the Illyrian theory of Albanian linguistic origins, at least not yet; perhaps you agree that the Albanian language descends from a language (Proto-Albanian) that was closer to Dacian than Illyrian. Alexander 007 03:13, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

":OK, continue the good work Marius :-)" Not so good -> will be errors for sure :) I also need some help:

  1. how easy is to add some pictures with the location of the city. I send you an Ancient Map could you add some portion of them Map (a zoom) for each city?
  2. I need the Greek texts to can quote directly from their the original names
  3. References: for each etymology I need to add who said what on that subject

Like:

  Word: X  
  References:
   [Parvan] '...'
   [Rosetti] '...'  Any help here?

Maybe you have other ideas? "perhaps you agree that the Albanian language descends from a language (Proto-Albanian) that was closer to Dacian" Yes, I agree. I think that Albanian was a Dacian Dialect: all the phonetic rules fit. The Romanian substratum rules fit too with the Dacian and PAlb ones. But the split from Pre-Romanians happened somewhere between sec VII- sec III BCE (that is in line with 'Marea Migratie Getica' - Vasile Parvan - Getica)--MariusA 04:07, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

1) Uploading images is easy, once you have them ready, but if you need zoom-ins and other modifications, I recommend User:Bogdangiusca who works a lot with images. However, he no longer has his email available.

2)I do not have access to most of those Greek texts, only to some like Strabo, etc. A few can be found on the internet, such as perseus.tufts.edu

3) Secondary sources! That's what I was requesting from you. In my area, I cannot find many books on the subject.

--Alexander 007 13:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Needed wikification

Here is a list of changes that should be made for easier reading and editing:

• Remove the bolding and italicization from the level three headings. The heading bolds them automatically, and they do not need to be italicized.
• Delete all of the spaces to the left of any lines of text, to avoid those ugly boxes. When a proto form starts a line, the asterisk should be set off with nowiki tags as such: *. Otherwise, the wiki syntax will interpret the asterisk as the beginning of a list.
• Either remove the anchored redirects, or modify both the redirects and the headings so that the anchored redirects actually link to the proper part of the article.
• Get rid of the {{unicode}} tags for IPA characters that are also part of the English alphabet.
• Convert the tables of cognates into lists
• Fix or remove the broken links in the lists of cognates. At the very least, move them so that the name of the link isn't the whole line.
• Don't change the fonts--they're fine as it is.

NatusRoma | Talk 05:32, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I have changed the first section, like so: [1]. Use it as an example for the rest. NatusRoma | Talk 05:57, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

No, your format's too bland. See below. Alexander 007 17:23, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Whatever format is settled on, I do not like those HTML style boxes either. It's not Wiki style. Alexander 007 06:05, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

NOW you don't know when a word start and when a word end or a rule start or a rule end ETC....I'm tired about all these 'formats' that finally will not allow to anybody to read If you propose soemthiong please DO IT and NEXT TAKE A LOOK ON THE RESULTS--86.120.252.127 07:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Easy, easy; writing in caps doesn't look good for a linguist. NatusRoma's format is much too bland and not what we're looking for; I found a format that may be what we're look for; go to User:Angela/Calendar, and if you click on "Edit this page", you will see the code for her format. I may add that format into this article. Alexander 007 16:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I changed Akmonia to the new format,which is better than the HTML boxes; however, some things still need to be put in bold. Alexander 007 17:15, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

You're right, this is certainly a prettier format. NatusRoma | Talk 18:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. I'm back and raedy to format too :) Please help me with teh code of a horizontal line

---

[edit] Question about some etimologies

• Deva - city in Romania. Is it comming form Dacian dava/deva?

  unlikely. Romanian language lost intervowel "v". bogdan 17:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

  correct also. However vãduva was in Old Romanian 'vãduwa' and '-va' is a recent formation ...

• Dur - 'tough'. Is it a preserved form in Romanian from Dacian (Duras - "The Resistent One")

  no. it's borrowed from French "dur". bogdan 17:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

  Correct: and I'm really not sure about 'Duras' etymology 'tough' even was proposed by different linguists. User: marius alexandru

[edit] Not Satem, but Centum

Recent studies have shown that thraco-dacian is part of the Centum languages ^{see fragment, for arguments}. do look into that. or try buying the whole book. :P p.s.: there's something about this article that makes me approach it with skepticism. perhaps it's the satem/centum thing. or perhaps the fact that the author completely forgot about the obvious, omnipresent "carp", but insisted in mentioning the forgotten, irrelevant for today's romanian, "akmōn" IleanaCosanziana 23:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)