![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Then hypothetically and theoretically there was a Proto-Baltic people (Proto-Balts).
I've got to do more research on the Baltic region, peoples, and languages.... Gringo300 12:23, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
that is reconstructable by comparative method. Almost all the isoglosses that connect Baltic languages, and that leave Slavic languages aside are either 1) trivial 2) provably secondary development among already differentiated Baltic dialects after the separation of Slavic 3) do not display any kind of relative chronology (the most important thing!). There's just too much mismatch between Western and Eastern Baltic - their common ancestor must necessarily go all the way to Balto-Slavic period. No wonder this article is a two sentence stub ^_^ -- Ivan Štambuk ( talk) 12:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Old Prussian and Latvian share more commonalities with Slavic languages than Lithuanian.
I'm guessing this means, Old Prussian and Latvian share more commonalities with Slavic languages than Lithuanian does.
But it could also be taken to mean, Old Prussian and Latvian share more commonalities with Slavic languages than with Lithuanian. Koro Neil ( talk) 14:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
However, critics point out that the phonology and morphology, which is shared by all known Baltic languages, is much more archaic than that of Proto-Slavic, retaining many features attributed to other attested Indo-European languages roughly 3000 years ago.
Shared archaisms are not evidence of a close taxonomic connection. Archaisms can be shared by languages quite distant from each other on a linguistic family tree. It is shared innovations that determine taxonomic relationships, particularly when they are numerous. The question is, what innovations do the Baltic languages share that can be determined to be absent in Proto-Balto-Slavic? Koro Neil ( talk) 23:07, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Then hypothetically and theoretically there was a Proto-Baltic people (Proto-Balts).
I've got to do more research on the Baltic region, peoples, and languages.... Gringo300 12:23, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
that is reconstructable by comparative method. Almost all the isoglosses that connect Baltic languages, and that leave Slavic languages aside are either 1) trivial 2) provably secondary development among already differentiated Baltic dialects after the separation of Slavic 3) do not display any kind of relative chronology (the most important thing!). There's just too much mismatch between Western and Eastern Baltic - their common ancestor must necessarily go all the way to Balto-Slavic period. No wonder this article is a two sentence stub ^_^ -- Ivan Štambuk ( talk) 12:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Old Prussian and Latvian share more commonalities with Slavic languages than Lithuanian.
I'm guessing this means, Old Prussian and Latvian share more commonalities with Slavic languages than Lithuanian does.
But it could also be taken to mean, Old Prussian and Latvian share more commonalities with Slavic languages than with Lithuanian. Koro Neil ( talk) 14:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
However, critics point out that the phonology and morphology, which is shared by all known Baltic languages, is much more archaic than that of Proto-Slavic, retaining many features attributed to other attested Indo-European languages roughly 3000 years ago.
Shared archaisms are not evidence of a close taxonomic connection. Archaisms can be shared by languages quite distant from each other on a linguistic family tree. It is shared innovations that determine taxonomic relationships, particularly when they are numerous. The question is, what innovations do the Baltic languages share that can be determined to be absent in Proto-Balto-Slavic? Koro Neil ( talk) 23:07, 5 June 2024 (UTC)