Talk:Baltic languages

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Languages, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, and easy-to-use resource about languages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
language Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Baltic languages is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Lithuania on Wikipedia. To participate simply edit the article or see our to-do list. On the project page we have some tools to help you out. Don't hesitate to ask questions!
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
Comments Please leave a short summary to explain the ratings and to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

This article is part of WikiProject Latvia, a WikiProject related to Latvia.
Latvia Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Does Balto-Slavic exist?

The unsupported claim "closely related to Slavic" is dubious, and should be edited away. See for example, Harvey E. Mayer Was Slavic a Prussian Dialect? Lituanus, (1987) who replies in the negative.

See also: Harvey E. Mayer Tokharian and Baltic versus Slavic and Albanian Lituanus, (1991)

and Petras Klimas Baltic and Slavic Revisited Lituanus, (1973) for a review of the points of debate, and a listing of the scholars and their positions.

Basically, current scholarship indicates that "Balto-Germanic" might be the more accurate name for the language group.

Note also http://www.lituanus.org/IndexLanguage.htm Lituanus is a forum for articles dealing with the linguistics of the Slavic and Baltic languages; note however, that many current theories are hotly debated, and there is no small amount of nationalistic pride involved, which can color the presentation.

See also http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/6623/pie.htm for a reference to the supra-archaic nature of Lithuanian (at bottom of article). User:Linas Dec 2004

i know both latvian(baltic language) and russian(slavic language)and i'd say that they share great similariness both in grammar structures and vocabulary,much greater one than between german and latvian.

[edit] Prussian

“ "The East-West-Prussian native speakers were for the most part expelled and deported by Soviet conquerors between 1945-49. That language therefore greatly suffered over the last 50 years due to the refugee/deportee survivors living in many scattered places." ”

What native speakers? Old Prussian became extinct by the end of 17th century! I think the facts quoted have nothing to do with the language. History of Prussians is for another article...

“ "But a large part of the language was retained in Ostpreussisch-EastPrussian German dialects" ”

Any proofs? Links? Sources?

[edit] What 'recently' means?

What is meant, saying ?the Balts did not use writing until fairly recently ?? Lithuanians used written language before the Christianizing rarely. If someone said they didn't used at all, it were quite the truth. It was a cultural tradition, for all their neighbors used written language more often at this time, and this kind of language was doubtless known for Lithuanians. But from the times of Christianizing , it was used. It was used more and more, and breaking the tradition, in the end of XIX century Lithuanians became a nation with quite big census of literacy (more than 60%. I don't have precise data currently). Printed books in Lithuanian appeared first time about one hundred years later, they did in the Europe at all. Do you mean it ?recently?? The same is with Latvians, here only the dates differ a bit.
Prussian or Old-Prussian language dropped out in about the beginning of XVII century. Later German, Lithuanian (in the north part) and Polish (in the south-east part) languages were used in Prussia only, until 1944. user: LinasLit


Before the first conquest attempts a thousand years ago...

Was that really so? 1009 A.D. first mentioning of Lithuania in written sources, and border conflicts with slavic people is all i know from that period.user: LinasLit

A reference indicating written Lithuanian/Baltic prior to the 10th century is needed. I don't beleive such a reference exists: lack of written Lithuanian of this date, much less 1000BC or 2000BC is one of the stumbling blocks to the study of archaic Baltic and Indo-European. user: Linas

[edit] The "Baltic" group of Indo-Europeans does not exist

"The Western Balts used the word "PANU", whereas the Central Balts used the word (Lith.) "UGNIS". Both words have cognates in other ancient Indo-European languages. That such archaic diversity existed within Proto-Baltic presents some interesting issues." (from http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/6623/proto.htm ; the external link provided in the article)

The opinion of some linguists is that there the Latvians and Lithuanian were initially two distinct Indo-European groups, due to the fact that there are many differences (phonetical/structural) between the archaic Latvian and Lithuanian, and they created a "language union" (sprachbound) by living as neighbours for hundreds/thousands of years (that would explain the common features).

I won't change anything, as I am not a linguist, nor have enough knowledge in Baltic languages, but I just read a pretty convincing article on this on www.lituanus.org (I can't find the exact link at the moment) Bogdan | Talk 12:07, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It's nonsense that Latvian and Lithuanian made the "union". Latvian and Lithuanian departed from the same language about 5th century. Lithuanian and Latvian have the same roots. One problem is that Finno-Ugric Lybian (Lyvian) language influenced Latvian phonetics.

I also agree that it's nonsense that Latvian and Lithuanian made the "union". They are *far too similar* to be a mash-up. An intelligent Lithuanian can open a Latvian book and do a good job of reading/puzzling thier way through it; latvian is lithuanian, but without the vowels, in a U CN RD THS sort of way. p.s. the link http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/6623/proto.htm says nothing about such a union, and in fact recounts the more-or-less commonly accepted, mainstream theories. Anyway,a citation would be needed.

[edit] Temporary copy

I am attempting a rework of this article in Baltic languages/temp. My first edit should appear there shortly, and I'll look for input then. --Theodore Kloba 18:35, 2005 Jan 3 (UTC)

My rewrite is done, although more historical information is still needed. I think I have addressed the various conflicting viewpoints regarding history and genetic relationship. Unless objections are voiced here, I will replace the original article with the new one soon.--Theodore Kloba 21:14, 2005 Jan 6 (UTC)
I made a few tweaks and completed the copy.--Theodore Kloba 22:38, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Category

I think this page should be listed in both Category:Baltic languages and Category:Indo-European languages, especially since some linguists believe the Baltic group is not appropriate to begin with. --Theodore Kloba 15:12, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion

A deletion discussion is taking place for a related article linked from this one:

[edit] Inaccurate Map

Upon closer observation one detects several obvious errors in the map supplied with this article. Firstly, "Finnish" should read "Finnic". Secondly, the area where one of the Finnic languages - Livonian - was spoken by the Livonians in the 11th-12th century extended along the eastern coast of the Gulf of Riga (roughly from modern border of Estonia) down all the way to at least the Daugava river (later city of Riga, and possibly beyond); which is quite well documented in the 13th c. chronicles. That area should be clearly marked white, at least 30-50km wide. The chronicles also mention the now extinct tribe of "Wends" who then resided around what is now Cesis (Wenden) in northern-ish Latvia. The Wends, at least by contemporary chroniclers, were considered an entity separate and different from Latgals, and as far as I know, no evidence has been found yet about whether the language they spoke was Finnic or Baltic. So perhaps a bit of grey colour in that area of the map would be in order. As the map itself lacks source information (and risks deletion) as of now, perhaps someone (say from Latvia, with a better grasp of local history) can find a better map from another source or, alternatively, redraw and correct the obvious errors in the current one? The source can then be cited as IMIU (I Made It Up:) Cheers, --3 Löwi 13:16, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Place name distribution

I foun this map - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Balt_vietovard.png but I can't place it in article for some reason or maybe pictures from commons doesn't show up in preview ? -- Xil/talk 14:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

The map is copyvio. And you can use commons images just like images on WP. Just type [[Image:commons image.png]]! Renata 01:03, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
I know that, I think I messed something else. As for the image - are you sure it is copyvio ? I read coment in commons - if image is summary of three diferent works it could be crated exclusively for that journal and isn't copyrighted. -- Xil/talk 20:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Agh, it is a complicated matter. This user, Turbo, has been very disruptive on Lithuanian wiki and got banned several times. But then things started to look normal again. And - bam - there are these images (more on lt wiki). He says they are from a journal that he worked for and that the journal did not place any copyrights on anything. But then he refuses to provide any evidence for the claims. Then he made all those personal attacks agains lt wiki admins. And he got banned again, this time looks like for good. So... who knows. Renata 03:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I have the question. Was it necessary to make some copy of journal page with nocopyright and send somwhere to you or was it necessary to scan that page and place in wikipedia? Maybe if there was some accusement, then accusors first must have a glance at this journal?. Now, there is no map of Baltic names spreading - this seems to be disruptive.

[edit] Discussion with administrator Dbachmann

Thanks, for remark and undo - (cur) (last) 12:17, 17 July 2007 Dbachmann (Talk | contribs) (9,796 bytes) (rv. PCT may be "modern", but nobody believes in it. This article isn't about neolithic culture of the Baltics.) (undo), I really made mistake, not mentioning, that by scientific research (habil dr. Algirdas Girininkas, former chief of department at institute of Academy of Sciences) comparing the long sequence of Baltic sea cost cultures there was prooved not disrupted continuity of those cultures starting from the very beginning, so it was concluded that language developed continuously too. The oldest layer of Finnish is Baltic...Some very old loans from Basque (sea...) are detected in Baltic and Lithuanian too. Baltic verb system is much more close to German than Slavic. Baltic suffered these influences - protoSlavic-German, and later Finnish. Slavic - much more. Baltic languages are the most conservative and archaic ide languages, so let for us to explain to the people about our roots. One of the scientists who develops this theory is Prehistorian Marcel Otte (world known, famous and evaluated to be leader) from Université de Liege. So, the question is not "nobody believes it" but how scientificaly and logicaly it was created by the team ttp://www.continuitas.com/workgroup.html. colin renfrew stresse in 1997 - As I was saying earlier, the real problem is the interface between these three fields of archeology or culture-history, genetics, and historical linguistics. And nobody's a master of all these fields, so I don't feel too diffident; one's always an amateur if you're going between them. . So complex view describing languges origin problems is necessary.

This administrator Dbachmann pushes the old hypothesys based on ideas of some polish historicians (Henryk Lowmianski. Studja nad początkami spoleczenstwa i panstwa Litewskiego. T I-II.Wilno, 1931-32.) - According to one old theory from 50-60ties of XX age, the Indo-European tribes speaking the dialects that would become the Baltic languages probably settled in the area South of the Baltic coast in about the 13th Century B.C. and later migrated towards the coast where they met an indigenous population of subsistence fishermen and farmers speaking a proto-Finnic language.

This is nonsence, becouse of much earlier baltic tribes Bronze age beginning at the coast of Baltic sea than 13th Century B.C.!!!78.62.22.250 08:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prehistory?

Hi, the text in the history/prehistory section seems highly implausible to me. Apart from being written in poor English, which makes it very hard to read, it clearly contains pseudoscientific claims. It is utterly impossible that Baltic speakers arrived at 8000 BC, when the IE languages probably didn't exist yet. This reads a like an attempt to make the Baltic languages seem as distinct as possible form the Slavic languages group, in order to eliminate the concept of a Baltic-Slavic group, advocated by Soviet scientists with an equally political agenda. Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 14:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)