Talk:Albanian language/Archive 3

"Native"
I removed this, on the grounds that the source does not back the claim being made. The source only says that Albanian has been spoken in Greece since the 13th-14th century, which does not mean "native" in any way. To use this source to say that the language is "native" to Greece is intellectually dishonest. Also, a few villages here and there is not lede material. Besides, northwestern Greece is already mentioned. Can you imagine if we did that for every language? Also note how "northwestern Greece" is mentioned twice in this version. This is very sloppy and poor editing. Khirurg (talk) 03:38, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It is an EU study for one. I am curious as to why you deleted outright the study from the article as well, considering its all about Albanian speech in Greece ? Albanian language being in Greece from 13th-14th centuries has no issue about it being considered "native", the Albanian diaspora is also cited as native. What is native then ? North Western Greece  (Greek Epirus and Florina area speak shqip) is different from southern Greece which the variety of of Albanian spoken is Arvanitika (Arberisht) and different from communities in Thrace (which are new post 1923 after leaving Turkey). Anyway some additional views from other editors who have expertise in the area would be good to hear especially since similar things were discussed by  and ,on the wikiproject Greece page not long ago.Resnjari (talk) 05:21, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Well the infobox listed Greece as one of the places where Albanian is "native". Although it is somewhat arbitrary what is "native", I find a language penetrating an area in the late Middle Ages to be listed as "native" somewhat odd. Is Spanish native to the Americas? Is Serbian" "native" to Kosovo? It is certainly true that Albanian is widely spoken in Greece, but I wouldn't consider it "native".  "Spoken in" and "Native to" are different things. Khirurg (talk) 05:32, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Look the reason why the Euromoasiac study is in this article because it is accessible for anyone, it meets the criteria or wp:reliable and wp:secondary and it is funded by the EU (a organisation which Greece is part of). On Middle Ages and "native", some in Serbian and Macedonian academic circles maintain that Albanians only arrived in Kosovo and Macedonia about 200-300 years. That is true only for parts of that population. And some Albanian academics maintain a similar view as you refer to Serbs in Kosovo. Nonetheless its still listed as "native" in the infobox. On Spanish in the Americas, one can make different comparisons like the Germans and the Ostsiedlung etc. Plague affected large parts of Epirus in the 13th and 14th centuries leaving many areas with a small to no population and Orthodox Albanian speaking people moved in, absorbed some of the remaining people and stayed (Giakoumis -whole study . Albanian speech a legacy of this. Please read the Euromosaic study in full, its not POV and why its used in this article as its about the Albanian language in wiki article about the Albanian language. Regardless of how they people identify in Greek Epirus, Albanian speech still exists among Orthodox Christians there in certain areas belonging to the variety continuum of Shqip (Cham and Tosk dialects), not Arberisht (Arvanitika). For more also see Baltsiotis p.5 [] about Fanari). It why i elaborated on it with those few short words about north western Greece in the lede, as its different from Arvanitika and Thrace thing.Resnjari (talk) 06:07, 4 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, yes, the Euromosaic source is fine and all, that's not the issue. The issue is that it doesn't say that Albanian is "native" to Greece. This issue could be resolved by changing "native to" to "spoken in", although a distinction should be made between areas where Albanian is spoken by practically everyone (Albania, Kosovo) and places where it is a minority language. Regarding the northwestern Greece thing, I don't dispute the validity of what you are saying, I am saying that the article lede is not the place to go into this level of detail. The distinction between north-western Greece, Arvanitika, and Thrace, can be elaborated on in the body of the article, but the lede of the article is only meant to provide a very brief overview and not go into detail. Khirurg (talk) 06:28, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * You can change it to "spoken in". That's fine. The lede only cites Arvanitika and Albanian spoken in Western Thrace. These are separate varieties of Albanian. The lede does not cite its presence in North-Western Greece which is significant in certain areas and part of the shqip continuum, separate to the other two. Its why i had the wording "Albanian is also spoken in parts of north-western Greece" to cover that and not be detailed and was my preference. Another alternative can be "Albanian is also spoken in some parts of Greek Epirus and Florina region in north-western Greece" to make it precise.Resnjari (talk) 06:36, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Well I was pinged here but it looks like you two are somewhat close to a solution. I don't think double mentioning NW Greece is necessary in the lede -- this deletion by Khirurg [] seems fine to me although I would rather preserve that inline. "Native to" in the inbox often means where its natively spoken (mother tongue) I believe -- hence why for German it includes "also in the worldwide German-speaking diaspora" for "native to". Perhaps a solution there is to partially follow the German model? --Yalens (talk) 08:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I have been trying for the better part of an hour to change that "native" bit into "spoken to" on the infobox without success (refreshing the page over and over getting that red writing error message), the language template  does not provide any alternative either (sigh). The German model looks ok for the infobox. On the lede ok i go with that wording, as long as the Euromosaic source stays, as its an academic EU source.Resnjari (talk) 09:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Khirurg's removal seems reasonable to me too. Yalens is right that mentioning Greece that many times on the lead, is unnecessary too. -- ❤ S ILENT R ESIDENT  ❤ 09:45, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * As long as the Euromosaic source is not removed (as was done previously ), i said i am ok with it. On the bit on the infobox, waiting on others to respond.Resnjari (talk) 09:49, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Well if we can't get "spoken in" to work in the box, my crossed suggestion of adopting the German model applies, if anyone might be interested.--Yalens (talk) 12:34, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * , on the infobox matter came across the page on the Arvanitika, Macedonian language, Aromanian language, Turkish language it is listed as "native" to Greece in the infobox. So kind of wondering about the matter here if its allowed to stand over there in those article -with the first 3 languages not recognised in the country.Resnjari (talk) 07:57, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm ok with it, as i previously said.Resnjari (talk) 13:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree it's too weird to mention twice the same info in lead (that Albanian is spoken in some Greek settlements etc.) with the excuse that some communities speak "Shqip" and some other "Arberisht".Alexikoua (talk) 12:56, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * That bit is resolved. Discussion has moved on.Resnjari (talk) 13:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Just a Romance language
What the F? I've just listened to a few hours of Albanian with English translations during the last few days, and I can understand almost everything with my knowledge of Romance languages - in fact, Albanian seems totally a Romance language to me, closer to Italian than even Romanian. Granted, the words are more "distorted" or rather transformed away from Latin than with other Romance languages, but still clearly recognizable/intellegible. In short, I find it utterly absurd to consider it an independent branch of IE, it should be considered a Romance language or at least very closely related to the Romance branch. --91.47.41.241 (talk) 21:01, 20 November 2017 (UTC)


 * What makes a language part of an independent branch of IE is independent of how much it's borrowed from neighboring languages. There are a lot of French words in English, a lot of German words in Estonian, and a lot of Persian words in Armenian, but that's neither here nor there. Heck, there are a lot of Arabic words in Persian, and a lot of Chinese words in Japanese, but in both cases, they aren't even in the same language family!
 * As for Albanian, it has borrowed vocabulary from Latin, Slavic, Greek, Turkish, Italian, and English, not just Latin and Italian.
 * Even when it's borrowed vocabulary from Latin, it's not necessarily obvious because of sound and meaning changes, so I really doubt that even with the most talented ear, you could actually pick up much Albanian from knowing Romance languages.
 * Even if you're right, that's original research. Can you find a reputable scholar that agrees with you? --Macrakis (talk) 23:42, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * In the field of linguistics Albanian is treated as an independent branch due it still containing a core of some few hundred words that are unique to it, along with its own language rules and substratum on which other borrowings occurred. Its more complicated, and the main article goes into that.Resnjari (talk) 08:54, 21 November 2017 (UTC)


 * To be fair: Romanian and Albanian have a very limited mutual intelligibility (i.e. not really but far beyond that which is typical of languages of different branches), due to sharing a lot of core vocab as well as the same set of later influences (Greek, Slavic, Turkish). So an Albanian speaker, especially one who knows a bit of a Romance language could hear sentences from that Romanian sentences like "am nevoie de tine" and understand what many of them mean (note "nevoie" is shared but its actually not originally Latin) . It's also true that Latin vocab in Albanian is more than half the lexicon, so Albanian is slightly more Latinized than English and also more than some langues d'oil. The good comparison would be Armenian and Persian -- and notably Armenian was misclassified as an Iranic language for a time.
 * I'm planning to make a page on this in a few months or so, if anyone is interested in contributing, along the lines of Slavic influence on Romanian, using Orel and etc. Any other sources in that area are greatly appreciated, because I do want more variety of authors to pull from. --Calthinus (talk) 18:18, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

BS. Albanian is an own branch bc-it-is-an-own-branch. Finally get over it and stop being so salty.

Do you really think you know better than SEVERAL linguists who STUDIED and SPEAK albanian. How ignorant (avoiding the word 'stupid') are you?

If albanian was a romance language - it would be THE romance language. However, Albanian is much older than latin. So... 🙂 ILYHDRAB (talk) 06:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)


 * E tmerrshme kjo, krejt te huajtit duan ta shkruan historine tone, ta ndertojn historin dhe gjuhen tone sic duan ata.. ju lumt te gjithve atinve qe kontribojn fakte te verteta ne keto artikuj ..

Firma me emrin MOLIKA në Tetov (Maqedoni) mashtron popullin i cili ka shum probleme më të holla kjo firm jep para saksisht deri (200 euro) dhe pasi mbaron obligimi njerzit i marin parat dhe pastaj i japin sërish dërsa kur regjistrohen në pun rregjistruesi thot do ju fi nje leter!E ju do pyesni se cfar letre?Ai do thot nuk ka rëndesi! Letra do vi kur ta mbaroni punën dhe ju aty punsoheni pasi kryhet xhdo gjë arrin letra dhe aty shkruan duhet ti ktheni 1130 denar apo pak me ndryshe 10 perqindëshin.

Kryesor Ylber ..... 19!! Regjistror Faton ..... 1991-1992 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.217.2.241 (talk) 13:47, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Pre-Greek Words section
A recently added section entitle "Pre-Greek Words" is problematic.

Its first two paragraphs read:
 * In many of the ancient Greek writings there are found many words that are considered pre-Greeks, ‘Barbarian’, and non-Greek origin. Ancient Greek authors like Socrates have stated that some of the names (Gods, Places, etc) have a foreign origin. New researchers have noticed that some of those considered pre-Greeks word belong to Albanian language vocabulary.
 * For instance, in The Dialogues of Plato's Cratylus, Socrates states: "To say that names which we do not understand are of foreign origin; and this is very likely the right answer, and something of this kind may be true of them;". Also when he tries to give the etymology of the word Pan, Socrates states: “Then surely Pan, who is the declarer of all things (παν) and the perpetual mover (αι πόλος) of all things, is rightly called αιπόλος ‘aipolos’". In Albanian ‘ai polos’ = ‘He is playing’ and the God Pan allays is depicted to play the pan flute.

There are indisputably pre-Greek words in Greek, either from other Indo-European languages (possibly including the ancestor of Albanian) and from non-Indo European languages. But Socrates is not a WP:RS reliable source for historical linguistics. In any case, it is unclear what these paragraphs have to do with this article. The third paragraph reads:
 * One of the many authors (like Giuseppe Crispi, Zacharie Mayani, Iakovos Thomopoulos, Niko Stillos, Petrit Laze, etc.) that takes this direction further is Altin Kocaqi in his book “Dokumente historiko-gjuhësore: vëndi i shqipes ndër gjuhët evropiane” (Historic-Linguistic Documents: the role of Albanian language in European languages). He takes into consideration pre-Greek world found in Hesychius of Alexandria, Homer, Herodotus, Hesiod, etc. He placed hundreds of the pre-Greek world side by side with the Modern Greek translation and the Albanian word. Clearly demonstrating that those pre-Greek words meaning it is preserved in the Albanian words. For instance, the first word starting Homer’s Iliad (Homeric Greek) is "Μῆνιν" (minin, mënin) that means ‘anger’ and in Greek is translated in ‘θυμός’ while the corresponding Albanian words are in Geg dialect ‘mëni’ and in Tosk dialect ‘mëri’. So, clearly the Albanian word preserves the meaning and proves that the pre-Greek word belongs to Albanian language.

Zacharie Mayani is a well known fringe researcher with theories about Etruscan and Albanian which are not accepted in academic circles.

No bibliography is given for Iakovos Thomopoulos, Niko Stillos, and Petrit Laze, and a quick search on Google Scholar finds no publications. So they don't belong in the article.

Giuseppe Crispi's work on Albanian was published in 1831, and doesn't take into account the (then-novel) Indo-European theory. And of course historical linguistics has moved on since then in many other ways as well.

I have not seen Altin Kocaqi's book (and I'm afraid I don't read Albanian), but again, he seems to be unknown in the scholarly world. The fact that some words in Homeric Greek are similar to some words in modern Albanian can be explained in many ways, and does not "prove that the pre-Greek word belongs to Albanian language". For one thing, the accepted Indo-European etymology of μῆνις (me:nis) is *men- and is related to other words in Greek (μανία 'madness, rage', μαίνομαι 'to rage, be mad') and other Indo-European languages (Sanskrit manyu- 'spirit, anger, rage'). Albanian could have inherited the same IE root, it could have borrowed the word at some early stage, or it could be a coincidence.

I conclude that this is a fringe theory and does not belong on the Albanian language page. --Macrakis (talk) 22:06, 29 January 2018 (UTC)


 * First things first: Since you do not know Albanian language at all... why are you editing these page and talking about theories you admit you can not understand? You are clearly acting emotionally as a 'Greek Nazi' by censuring information!
 * First paragraph, I have taken Socrates work which is on the internet for anyone to see! Not as a linguistic theory but as an language used with word to be translated and understood. Since you can not understand the sample word in Greek language than why dispute something you do not know?!
 * If I see an Albanian word or expression than I have the right to point it out as it is Albanian! After all I am citing the work and properly directing to those who would like to research it further. Why so many World Authors cite Socrates?!
 * The same with the other word sample taken from Omer' Iliad, since you do not understand Albanian why don't you talk about what you can make out of English and Greek?!
 * So basically you are saying: "When I show you the wolf, you ask me for the tracks of that wolf!"


 * I did not show you a similar word but the same word written in Greek alphabet and than in Latin alphabet. The meaning of that word does not change! That is important to get it. In English is translated Anger, In Greek 'Thimos' (θυμός), In Albania 'Mëni', in Homeric is written "Μῆνιν" (mënin) and NOT 'μῆνις' (me:nis). So you are writing it incorrectly trying to fit in a complete different word by mining and writing!


 * Simply, cause you do not know Albanian that gives you the authority to esclude it from being Albanian?!


 * I am not telling you theories, the only conclusion is for those who do not know what you already accepted: That there are pre-Greek words that come from a different language. But when I see the word, after writing it with the Latin character instead of Greek character, that matches the Albanian word... there is no theory at all.


 * Do you you understand that if the word is written the same and it has the same meaning in the context, than they are the same?!


 * Instead you want to accept something that a stupid author (s) used to do to make everything SOUND Greek just because!
 * People who twist and turn the words to make you believe they are the same: So AGAIN from Μῆνιν" (mënin) you take "μῆνις (me:nis)" ... do you see the first twist 'ν' into 'ς'?! ... than compare it with different words (μανία 'madness, rage', μαίνομαι 'to rage, be mad')"!!! Just because you are Greek and you like to call it Greek word... Now that you mention it ... you are a maniac (this it really comes from μανία)!


 * Also, what is wrong if some Author research and translate Etruscan into Albanian?
 * Does it mean that nobody is allow to translate ancient scripts into Albanian?


 * You say "In any case, it is unclear what these paragraphs have to do with this article. "
 * It is about Albanian Language, and when providing knowledge that there are some Albanian words in use that match Pre-Greek or Non-Greeek Homeric time words!
 * So it is like doing language 'archeology' ... what it there you looking to understand?
 * You accept that it may be, but because you do not know Albanian language at all.. you do not accept it! The problem is that many of the Best Authors out there often make mistakes and often are forced politically to right not true information. We need a bit of logic to sort out now and than :)
 * First of all, for Greeks it is shocking to learn that half of them have same origin with Albanian. A few years ago to write in Wikipedia that Arvanites are same as Albanian was impossible, but now the page in Wikipedia exists and I was write 10 years ago while those who argued with me... have nothing but to accept of wasting their time arguing for nothing.


 * Anyway, still there is a paragraph about Petro Zheji and his book "The Messianic Role of Albanian language". One day will be a hit!
 * The Dictatorship in Albania did not allow the book to be published. So, do you want the knowledge?
 * (unsigned post by User:BenWeb13 2018-01-29T21:07:19)


 * No, this is crazy fringe material that will never be a hit, especially not if its title claims Albanian's historical role was "messianic"... I'm familiar with some of the literature in Albanian historical linguistics. If you want to read actually good material about the history of Albanian, check out Demiraj or Cabej or Orel, etc. Also please do not go into off-topic tangents about Arvanites -- the talk page is not a WP:FORUM for you to express your views about whatever comes to mind, it has to be relevant. --Calthinus (talk) 03:09, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * BenWeb13, Please indent your contributions consistently. You need to use the same number of ":" in front of every new line. Also, please sign your contributions. You can do this using --~, which automatically fills in your name and the timestamp.


 * Now, for the substance.


 * Calling me a "Greek Nazi" is personal attack and is not allowed by our rules. If you do that again, an administrator will probably sanction you. Your comment "Just because you are Greek and you like to call it Greek word... Now that you mention it ... you are a maniac" is also an unacceptable personal attack.


 * Please read our rules about what constitutes a reliable source. Socrates is of course an important historical figure, and Plato's writing about him is an important primary source, but he is not a reliable source in linguistics.


 * Your "recognizing" a word as Albanian is what we call original research. The Japanese word namae means 'name' and sounds almost the same. This does not prove that the words are the same. For that matter, it would be very strange for the Albanian word not to have evolved and changed in the 2500+ years since Homer.


 * As for the first word of Homer's Iliad, it is the accusative form of μῆνις, namely μῆνιν. The fact that modern Greek uses a different word for the same concept has very little importance. Ancient Greek called horses ίππος and modern Greek calls them άλογο; Latin called horses equus, but the modern Romance languages use versions of caballus; so what?


 * For some reason, you are transcribing μῆνιν as mënin. The Albanian letter <ë> represents the vowel /ə/, while the ancient Greek letter <η> represents the sound /ɛː/; why are you using ë? In any case, I do not know the etymology of mëni; for all I know, it may in fact be related to Greek μῆνις one way or another.


 * As for the long common history between Greeks and Albanians, I think you'll find in my edit history that I have always been sympathetic to the Albanian/Arvanitic perspective.


 * Long story short: what is "obvious" to an amateur linguist is not linguistics, and is not acceptable on WP. --Macrakis (talk) 03:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Macrakis, OK, initially I did not have your explanation at all. All I had is somebody deleting my work which I did very carefully linked to many pages and citation. The sample ward that I run into reading the book of Plato translated by an English man, it was just as an example to explain that how different researches have found hundreds of them or maybe up to 2 thousand. So, the next paragraph I introduced a new book but you declared it a 'fringe'. For your own knowledge, I tell you that in a few years the sources that you consider as reliable will be called fringe and the new books will be about the real history of Albania with more fact related to Pelasgian and Etruscan as well. The Pelasgian theory of Albanian has been censured since Ottoman Empire. Since then the only language prohibited by law was Albanian language. So, the schools even in Albanian territory (than Province of Ottoman Empire) were in Greek, Latin, Turkish, Bulgarian... but NOT Albanian! Later on the French, English, Russian start applying similar policy by censoring the history of Albania. The turn the 'Greek' Empire into a Modern State Greece and censored the information and forced Arvanites under a Exemplary Genocide. If the Arvanites (who were most of Greece inhabitant) new their real history would accept to call themselves Greeks (as if a special blood type different from Albanian) and hate their ancient roots?! BTW, if you like to learn more about Greek history please check "Ben Web" YouTube Channel I have added google books links on the comments below the video clips. --BenWeb13 (talk) 01:28, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Anybody, can you tell if this is a 'fringe' or not? Can I use this as source? Les Pélasges, Précurseurs de la civilisation greco-romaine Histoire/Politique - 446 pages - 170x240 ISBN : 9782753903005 Mathieu Aref https://www.connaissances-savoirs.com/les-pelasges.html/

"Mathieu Aref is a French researcher of Albanian origin born in 1938 in Cairo (Egypt) where he attended secondary and university studies (Arts and Fine Arts) in French and Italian institutions. He has published two books on Prehellenic Greece and Albania (2003/2004) which have been translated into Albanian (2007/2008). He submitted a doctoral thesis at the Sorbonne Paris IV on 3/01/2012 under the title "Research on the Pelasgians at the origin of the Greek civilization". The present work is the result and the outcome of nearly fifty years of studies and research (historical, archaeological, mythological, ethnolinguistic) on the origins of the Greco-Roman civilization and especially the Pelasgians (history, culture and language) predecessors of the Greeks and not their ancestors. The Thracians, Illyrians and current Albanians are their last direct descendants. Finally, his knowledge of the Albanian language allowed him to decipher and decipher most of the anthroponyms, theonyms, toponyms and oronyms of the Iliad, the Odyssey and Greek Mythology." --BenWeb13 (talk) 01:04, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * The publisher is not a peer-reviewed journal. In fact, it looks like a print-on-demand site; it is basically self-published. For future reference, the content guideline Identifying reliable sources explains what is considered a "reliable source" and how to identify them.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 01:33, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks William, the article was just to let you know about what the book of the Author is. I was told that "Pelasgian" theory is or may be a "fringe", also t check before I post an Author if he is a "Fringe". I am reading the links you suggests, but still some time is difficult to rap the brain around so many regulation and terminology about them. So, what I understand is to check here first if the source is not a 'fringe', and there are at least 3 parts: The Theory, The Author, The Book or Article. So, I posted the link that describes the name of the author, the book, and the theory in short. Here is his Googe Books. Also, here about his Theses: http://www.theses.fr/2012PA040019. What I am asking is can I cite anything from These Author, His Book, or even Mention His Theory as per the WP rules? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenWeb13 (talk • contribs) 14:02, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * , the Pelasgian theory is pseudo-science, that came from a time in the 19th century when Albanian speaking peoples like the Arvanites began looking into their past and those ideas were borrowed by Albanians thereafter. Over a century and a half has passed and modern scholarship, has made them redundant. Please read this academic a paper by scholar Gilles De Rapper . Should explain things, although is is more out there. With more reading, research and time, you will be able to edit complex topics like this, but if you continue as you are you wont get far in Wikipedia and if anything there are other editors out there who might send you off to one of the forums for a sanction. Best.Resnjari (talk) 14:12, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * , Thanks for prompting in discussion. I will read 'Gelles De Rapper' as I have not. But FYI, we have to consider that the info war that is going on since Bulgarian, Serbian, Ottoman Empires and fallow is about the 'Pelasgian origin of Albanian'. Every scholar till today, all that they have accomplished is to provide THEORIES about Albanian Origin and Language! Nobody has made been able to give a 100% definition. So, I suggest that WP Admin and Contributor should step out of the Info War and represent different variants as it has done in the other page partially: "Origin of Albanians". The reason I say partially is that it should allow for the citation of varies Books that some Authors spent many years of research and it will go on and on. I am sure that we can not skip the censure for ever, but it is because of censuring the information that the Balkan is at war for long time! People should have the democratic rights to express themselves in a constrictive way. We know that some authors get invested to spread propaganda and we know that Cabej and Demiraj were under Dictatorship. Altin Kocaqi in his book DOKUMENTE HISTORIKO-GJUHËSORE (Historico-Linguistic Documents) "MARIN BARLETI" 2013, cites both authors Cabej: “Një interes të veçantë për gjuhësinë shqiptare paraqet çështja a ka ndonjë lidhje midis gjuhëve ose gjuhës së substrakteve paragreke të Greqisë së vjetër dhe gjuhës shqipe, ose mbeturinave të atyre substrakteve në këtë gjuhë. Ky problem lidhet me emrin e Pellazgëve e të pellazgjishtes” Eqerem Çabej. “Hyrje në historinë e gjuhës shqipe I”, f 90 sh b “Çabej”, Tiranë 2008. And Demiraj: "Po e fillojmë me mbishkrimin e Limnos 41, 42 që dhe akademiku ynë Shaban Demiraj e pranon si mbishkrim pellazgjik." Demiraj Sh, “Etruskët, Pellazgët, Ilirët dhe Shqiptarët”. Tiranë 2008. Can you read Albanian or I have to translate all? --BenWeb13 (talk) 14:56, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * , I read Albanian. Çabej, refers to issues of a substratum, or its leftovers, predating Albanian and Greek in the area and says in essence that the issue is linked with Pelasgians and Pelasgian language. By no means it suggests that Albanian and Pelasgian are linked. With Dermiaj all it says is that he considers certain writings on the island of Limnos to be Pelasgian -nthing about it saying its linked with Albanian. I would err on the side of caution with the Pelasgian theory. Arvanities used it and still us it, and its origin came from Greek circles who claimed that the Arvanites were Greek in the 19th century -it was in regards to assimilation etc. Some Albanians borrowed it as well, and it has been somewhat revived post 1992. In the end as of now its pseudo-science, as scholarship, credible ones, have not linked it to Albanian, nor with Greek. Read up on this. Use google books and scholar to find and access sources using key words like Pelasgian, Albanian etc. Best. On the Albanian language, most recent schoalrly views on the Albanian language are that it formed below the Danube sometime after the collapse of the Roman Empire out of paleo-Balkan peoples and languages (first source a lecture , second is Rusakov -2017 who gives the latest scholarly views etc on the Albanian language . Resnjari (talk) 15:41, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * , I have read and continue to read about this as it is going on until properly accepted. But the new Author that link what Cabej and Demiraj (which both under dictatorship and not allow to continue research in Pelasgian theories!) are saying, has worked to continue deciphering the Lemno's steel. So, both this authors have opened the door to further research. Demiraj accept that Lemno's steel is Pelasgian. Kocaqi (and many Albanian authors) is deciphering it and linking it to Albanian language. Also, Cabej accept that there are Ancient Greek words that are Pelagian, and Kocaqi again compare those to Albanian. Can we cite it? --BenWeb13 (talk) 15:56, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ,Demiraj says clearly on page 51 “barazimi pellazg-ilir nuk del i argumentuar as historikisht as gjuhësisht”. For others translated means "a Pellasgian-Illyrian reconciliation can not be argued for as being either historical or linguistically". In other words Illyrian stemming from Pelasgian, is a no, no. Cabej also does not make such claims. Look under communism there was censorship but one can not infer what was in a academic's head and it would be improper of us to speculate. We can only go by what they have published. Also Demiraj is around long after communism collapsed and has still not been in favour of Pelasgian-Albanian or Pelasgian-Illyrian links. Linguists however can discuss other languages that existed in the area etc as its their scholarly area of research like Cabej and Demiraj when discussing Pelasgians have always placed them in their ancient context (like the "Lemno's steel") without making speculations that could be fringe like being linked with Albanians or even the Illyrians. On Kocaqi, i would not put much into it. Even and when he publishes, i don't doubt for a second he will come under intense scrutiny first off from Albanian scholars yet alone from Western ones. Beni, you need to read up on the Pelsagian theory, its pseudo-science.Resnjari (talk) 16:33, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * The scholarly consensus today is that the ancient Greeks called "Pelasgian" anything that was old and not Greek. There is no reason to believe that there was a single Pelasgian people or language. Think of it as "pre-Greek", no more, no less. This may change some day, but Wikipedia doesn't publish new theories until they are accepted by some significant part of the international scholarly community. --Macrakis (talk) 16:15, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Wise words . Much appreciated.Resnjari (talk) 16:33, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * First thanks both and I have to agree with Macrakis last summery about the Pelasgian theory and its approval status, that was my assumption also. But I have to clarify what I have said. Cabej is admiting the existance of Pelasgian and related words (as you say left overs) and new researches are comparing them with the Albanian word. What you are saying is that we should not dare to compare those with Albanian words at least for the WP readers. Not even mentioning their similarity with Albanian words! While Demiraj an old man decided to look into the Pelasgian theories after long contribution under Totalitarian Dictatorship. What I said is that he accept the Lemno's steel as being Pelasgian. It is not up to him to force other conclusions upon next generation. What I am saying is: when the researchers of all nations have the right to try and decipher Lemno's Steel using any other language they know, why not Albanian using Albanian language are not allowed to do so or being rejected without even read?! What I get from your comments is that "Pelasgian origin of Albanian language is considered a 'Fringe' theory" and secondly nobody is consider as reliable source until we see that Albanian survive the war and all Serbian and other Nationalism will accepted defeat. For my opinion that is discrimination and part of being victim of others Nationalism. Protecting human rights of victims from the genocide and suppression of established Nationalism it is NOT a Nationalism! This is not only about suppression of human rights under a Dictatorship but also conspiracy by the Dictator and his chosen Academics to accept the Approved Framework by foreign agencies! When we talk about 100+ years of Genocide which comes of varies ways apply, for sure many Albanian themselves have been and still work against their own National interest. Like I told you earlier, I do not just help people but I define the core problem. I understand that WP executives may decide to enforce certain policies and I accept them by first clarifying the limits. I will continue with other ways to see that the pseudo-western Academics to be exposed as they deserve on fueling Nationalism. After all they have accepted destruction of Roman (Western Roman) and 'Greek' (Eastern Roman) Empires and creating Modern States in Balkan. I understand it is not up to any of WP Admin to address issue of Human Rights. As I may said early, I am defining the core problem that comes from the suppressed Academia, also the WP rules about how to chose the allowed resources. Another detail clarification is related to statement "Think of it as "pre-Greek", no more, no less" I agree with this statement. But are we allow to compare those "pre-Greek" words with Albanian words? I understand you are not allowing to be called "Albanian", but mentioning that SOME of those "pre-Greek" words are SIMILAR to Albanian words? --BenWeb13 (talk) 19:20, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * , on Demiraj, its one thing about him writing and suggesting that the Lemnos etchings might be Pelasgian and its another thing for us to draw a conclusion with and inferring something when there is nothing more to it. Demiraj is a linguist whose academic research expertise goes beyond just looking at Albanian but other Balkan related linguistic stuff. In his discussion on the Lemnos artifact it revolves around that and is disconnected from anything to do with Albanians, Illyrians etc. With Cabej his suggestions in his studies is that Pelasgian may have left a few words in Balkan languages that came after and replaced it. This is not something new in scholarship and has been cited in Western literature among linguists such as words in Greek that do not come from Hellenic stock and can not be explained as coming from anywhere else (see: Pre-Greek substrate) but are identified as being very old. I cannot stress this enough, Cabej and Demiraj have not engaged in pseudo-science of the Pelasgian theory. As for modern day research on the Pelsagians, it all in the realm of the hypothetical and on the fringe side. Caution must be taken. You need to do wide scale reading. The Pelasgian theory overall was invented in 19th century Greek political and cultural circles who needed something more to incorporate the Arvanites of the time whose Albanian traits (such as language) where a barrier to assimilation. This theory gave the Arvanites an avenue to say they were part of the Greek ethnicity and to fuse into one the Greek speaking and Albanian speaking inhabitants in the kingdom of Greece and its something Arvanites believe strongly even today. Nonetheless, whatever their beliefs and that of Albanians who have borrowed those ideas from them, in the end they are fringe and pseudo-science rejected in credible scholarship. I am saying this to be mean or anything, but you need to do a lot of reading, and i mean a lot. Otherwise you will be in all sorts of strife on wiki. You still have not come across certain editors who wont hesitate to make things difficult and send you over to the forums for a sanction without much discussion, like i have done here or a few other editors who have taken the time and care because your e newbie to the wiki project. You have an energy and that is good. But if you want to be around on Wikipedia, familiarize yourself with policy guidelines such as wp:reliable and wp:secondary on source and please do wide range reading and importantly observe wp:civil. Doing that will set you in good stead going forward. Best.Resnjari (talk) 19:52, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * , I am not saying to simply draw a conclusion on Lemno's steel. Even if it is not called Pelasgian or Etruscan, still Albanian researches have the right to try and decipher using Albanian language! I am not saying here me or you to draw a conclusion based on what Demiraj or Cabej say. We have to understand something very important. When we talk about Indo-European Languages Theory it simply a THEORY. So, theoretically anybody can draw their conclusions. But this theories are not Laws and have their own undefined areas. For instance there are not "Indo-European People" ... it is simple Grouping of Languages with a common label. So, to get back to Demiraj and Cabej they accept what they can in the circumstance. We only are limited to refer to as much as they are admitted as a reliable source. They did not attempt or could not decipher the Lemno's steel or did they?! Did anyone decipher it and it is acceptably by Academics? Can you post the attempts done by a few using Albanian language? Why not? What about the reading of Zagreb's Mumie? Can we publish (MENTION) a reference attempted reading using Albanian language done by Niko Stillo who have published an Etruscan - Albanian Dictionary? When Heinrich Schliemann found Troy we all cheer for it... so only when a foreign researcher using a foreign (non-Albanian) language decipher something we must accepted. Who was Ventri that we must accept it?! I am sure that Demiraj and Cabej and many Academics knows about what happen to Milan Suffly. Do you know that in Ottoman Archive was found a book not published about Pelasgian origin of Albanian? That proves the theory existed long before 19th century! I do know well the theory and anti-theories invented to convince the Arvanite (Albanian of Greece) under genocide to accept to the new ruler. Do you know why Arvanites have not been allowed to speak Albanian in public at all and discourage to speak at home?! I am not trying to convince you for no other reason but to clarify as you more then me need to understand the roots of the problems. My effort is exactly to define why Albanian are discouraged and in what ways, to find their own origin and also accept slavery and total ethnic cleansing. I do appreciate you and everybody who made comments and being patient with me. I am clearing out that I have not any complexity against you. But we all learn by exchange of ideas. When I talk about Nationalism I hold no hate against the people who are of that particular Nation but against the Phenomenon and the clan or agency who embrace it. I will check all links you suggest in time. BTW, if you check the YouTube video you suggested early, I have made some comment few months ago 'Ben Web'. Thank you!
 * Linguists are not sure about the nature of Pelasgian language, but one thing which we can be sure of is that we can not compare the current form of modern Albanian words with ancient ones. Have a look at the Old Albanian of Buzuku (which is the Albanian spoken 500 years ago) and you will understand how much language can change within 500 years. Now try to project it 3000 years ago and you will get a vague idea of how big this difference can be. Aigest (talk) 22:15, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks Aigest for prompting in this discussion. I checked that link Renjari brought to my attention: Pre-Greek substrate, even Proto-Greek language. So, when an Albanian researchers compare them to Albanian language word should we keep it secret? Or wait when an English, Jewish, American author find it? Not even able to MENTION that "A. Kocaqi has run a comparison table of 2000 pre-Greek words with Albanian words and Greek words and waiting to be peer reviewed."? BTW, I am not sure when you say "WE" who do you mean? Do you know the work of Altin Kocaqi, Niko Stillo, Arif Mati, Petrit Laze, etc.? --BenWeb13 (talk) 22:29, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Renjari, what about Eduard Schneider book or his translated book from Lek Pervizi (ex-prisoner) and article about it? Do you think he was "told by Arvanites"? Can we mention anything about Eduard Schneider or his translated book Eduard Shnaider: “PELLAZGET e pasardhësit e tyre!”? --BenWeb13 (talk) 23:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Look Ben, there are zillions of sources discrediting the outdated Pelasgian theory on wikipedia, yes it is fringe, we have gone round and round in circles about this, please read mainstream literature. We can only mention it insofar as discussing its former existence and perhaps its (unfortunate) persistence in certain Albanian fringe nationalist circles. Same goes for Etruscans. As for lule, this is a substrate word that is shared by both Greek and Albanian. Tho wiktionayr attributes both the Albanian, and Greek (and also Sanskirt, Persian and English, i.e. lily) words to Egyptian []. It has no Proto-Indo-European etymology and is thus extremely unlikely to be of Albanian (or Greek) origin -- instead it is from some mysterious substrate language that we know nothing about and sadly probably won't ever know much about. Just because some Albanian words sound like words in other languages with the same meaning does not mean you or wacky "scholars" can instantly assume Albanian is the source, much less modern Albanian. --Calthinus (talk) 02:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I have access to the book Ancient Languages of the Balkan (Katicic 1976). There you have summary on Pelasgian theories. Yes there are some renowned linguists (they fulfill WP:RS) who link Albanian with Pelasgian. Try to find and read that book and if you don't find it just mail me. Aigest (talk) 09:53, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , Demiraj and Cabej never wrote anything in support of Pelasgian origins for Illyrians or that for Albanians. Additionally they are also not known to have made any comments in this regard. So my point was that it would be mistaken to say so or to even try to guess what was their thinking inside their head, and it would be inappropriate to do so. In the end Demiraj and Cabej did not support Pelasgian theories. Just read up. Pelasgian theories are pseudo science and redundant. Those Albanian scholarship engage in such things are fringe and their usage questionable.Resnjari (talk) 15:14, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , Based on my reading I have assumed that Albanian, Greek, Armenian, and dead Sanskrit are considered the most ancient Indo-European languages. Is that accepted or not? In the scientific world (not just linguistics) it good practice not to esclude any theories until the write one is found. Till today we only have found THEORIES and specifically the most 'knowledgeable' approved authors are not sure where exactly to classify Albanian and not sure of its origin. (please correct me if I am wrong). Many new Albanian authors not only have revived the Pelasgian and Etruscan theories related to Albanian language but have improved it and will until it does get approved by those who linguistics how talk to much and say nothing. But, that list sentence again is for us not for WP. For WP you are saying that neither Eduard Schneider is an acceptable source and thanks for clarifying. Also, thanks for looking up the word 'lule' (lulia), in the Wiktionary link it compares it but the only close similarity is the Latin 'lilia' and than Ancient Greek λείριον (leírion), you are adding also Sanskrit, Persian and English, i.e. lily. Great answer so far. OK, since no approved linguistics have stated that 'lule' originaly comes from Albania, I can not publish that in WP. But to complete our discussions, it is logically to assume that the closest world in form and in usage is in Albanian language. Is it possible to say in WP something like that? Or simply to state in WP that there are similarity found in all this language as you described, without stating any origin or source but SIMILARITY)? --BenWeb13 (talk) 16:10, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Albanian lule isn't actually much closer to the hypothesised original than tohers and no language is "older" than others. You could make a fine scholar, just read the good sources and you'll know what is accepted in science and what has been discredited, okay man? --Calthinus (talk) 21:32, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , i don't want to be harsh but Wikipedia is wp:notaforum. Editors don't have time to answer you at this length on everything. Read up on things then come back. Some Albanian scholars are into the Pelasgian thing and for that their works cannot be used. The reason why its fringe is that very little has survived that can be identified as Pelasgian (or a people that the ancients referred to as such predating them) and any connections to groups thereafter are very hard to make that is why it is fringe and obsolete.Resnjari (talk) 16:15, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , About Demiraj and Cabej, I told you what was cited from them and only on A. Kocaqi book, In other words if the Lemon's steel is accepted by Demiraj as being Pelasgic script, are we allow to try and decipher with Albanian? (please do not divert my question) I am not assuming and I thing it is fair for any linguistic to try to decipher with any language dead or alive. Please show a bit decency or humanity about all those Albanian who research about their own origin and language, especially when nobody in this word has given a definite answer! I already explain the issue with those (pseudo-Nationalist or Religion Nationalist) who for centuries have invested to eliminate Albanian language for int existence. During Ottoman Empire many Albanian intellectuals were killed for attempting to teach Albanian kids how to writ they language. But in my last comment I asked you a direct question about a French author who has made many books called Eduard Schneider (i found many google books on his name but not the one about Albanians). But there is a translated version in Albanian and I was wondering if we could use it as a reliable source in WP or not? (this is to the previous comment you made). If you do not have time I understand. Thank you. --BenWeb13 (talk) 16:33, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , Thanks so much I found a google book preview of R. Katicic and will read from it. --BenWeb13 (talk) 17:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you Ben for your kind words! You can ask me on my talk page in case you need anything else. Bests Aigest (talk) 17:50, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , yes i am aware of the Ottoman Empire and its difficult relationship with Albanians at times. However just because Demiraj makes a suggestion on the Lemnos steel being of possible Pelasgian origin does not mean by default he is saying there is a connection to Albanian. If anything he rebuked that view about Pelasgian connections (i cited Demiraj above in my comments). Albanian academics can study and make connections wherever) but some are viewed as fringe in the scholarly community. Only after some other academics (and not just in Albania but outside of it) start backing a certain position as plausable that one can say that there is something to it. So far we are not there and as of now the Pelasgian theory is considered pseudo-science. We have to be cautious here, otherwise anything goes. On Schneider, he is from 1894, his book will be turned down for use as it does not fit criteria of wp:reliable and wp:secondary. Best.Resnjari (talk) 18:39, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , i came across this, its a academic study by John Wilkes on the Illyrians . Have a read. Best.Resnjari (talk) 20:55, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * You say: "I have assumed that Albanian, Greek, Armenian, and dead Sanskrit are considered the most ancient Indo-European languages". This is utter nonsense, and any source you're reading that says this should be thrown away. No language is older than any other language, any more than one family is older than another. All languages have ancestor languages that are 1000, 2000, 5000 years old. It's just that we don't have a record of most of these ancestors. In the case of Greek, we are lucky to have long literary texts (Homer) that appear to date from approximately the 8-7C BCE. We also have some non-literary texts written in Linear B that date from about the 15C BCE. The oldest version of Sanskrit we have is Vedic, which seems also to date to about the 15C BCE, though it was only written down centuries later. The oldest known text in Armenian is from the 5C CE, and the oldest in Albanian, unfortunately, is from the 15C CE. This does not mean that "Greek is older than Albanian". There are many Indo-European languages which have older attested forms than Albanian, including Latin, Old Persian, Old Church Slavonic, and Old English. This does not mean that their descendants, modern Italian, Kurdish, Serbian, and English (among others), are "older" or "better" than Albanian, just that we don't have a record of older forms of Albanian. There is even an Indo-European language with older texts than Greek and Sanskrit, namely Hittite, but no modern language is descended from it.


 * Really, you should learn more about language history if you want to contribute in this area on Wikipedia.


 * PS Could we please spell "Lemnos stele" correctly? And note that its language appears to be related to Etruscan, and not any Indo-European language. --Macrakis (talk) 21:59, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , Demiraj's views were only a suggestion with regards to the Pelasgians and proposed it being derived from them decades ago with the Lemnos stele -it was in relation to scholarly discussions about languages predating Illyrian and Greek in the Balkans. Nonetheless Demriaj makes no reference to it being connected to Albanians or Illyrians etc. It was during a time when scholars were less sure about the writing on the artifact then now. Overall Demiraj does not and has not supported the Pelasgian theory. Best.Resnjari (talk)


 * , My knowledge is wide in many areas and sometime I have time to read more in linguistics and some time in technology and more fields. Going back and forth it makes me difficult to memorize all the details and have a clear sentence compare to those who are only focused in linguistics for instance. Regardless I have read and will continue to read but I am focused more on cross linking the knowledge than simply accepting only one kind and directly applying filters that most people have in life (political, religion, national, profession, social status, gender, regional, etc.). I was trying to show and I value your and everybody impute. I come with a view that contributing to Wikipedia is enough to know how to cite a source, format the info properly, and now how to summarize it to get the point clear and concise. But, I learned that there are so many constrains and rules especially about some hot topics. I really appreciate your contribution to sort out. Also thank you for not being to short and sharing your views like in the last general question I made. Actually have read about Hittite and Anatolian languages and am always open minded to learn more as the time promises. Yes, I agree with you that there are many script in the area and even if some authors named them Hittite, Pelasgian, etc., it does not directly much only one modern language. I like to ensure you that if I express myself on accurately I did not meant to offend or belittle anyone. I understand also that if I say that Albanian or Greek language is oldest or older than other language, it could be offensive to many other people and for the WP at the moment any direct association to old script like Pre-Greek, Pelasgian, Etruscan, etc., to Albanian language would not be acceptable. My only question (last :) ) unanswered: if a source mention only comparison tables as I have already seen like Albanian words versus Illyrian, or Proto-IE, or Gothic, or Romanian, or Pre-Greek, or Etruscan, or others? I repeat ONLY comparison / cognates / similarities table WITHOUT ANY CONCLUSION "come from Albania" but simply "similarities found"? Like the example I talked earlier 'lule'-'lilia'-'lyli' (albanian-latin-sanscript) but with other ancient words that someone may call Etruscan or Hittite? Can I attempt to contribute here or not? (I believe those question and answers would be beneficial guide to any newcomer to WP because the theories I attempted are not going away they are simply pending recognition maybe partially like every theory that over time gets improved). I met in live linguistics how do not know all about the history you mention. A lot of info were censored and I am optimistic since more archives will be published on the internet and be free for all of us to explore. To what i observed: Knowledge is life and it changes like all things over time. --BenWeb13 (talk) 00:24, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , Never mind Demiraj and Cabej please I only brought a small citation and never mention any conclusion like you saying. I think I mention that some of their colleges during the Totalitarian Dictatorship in Albania where sentenced life imprisonment or death for writing something related to "Pelasgian origin or Albanian". We did not know that was a Global taboo. Many Albanian look at that as a Dictatorship era not as an Balkan or European censorship. For me language or history are not exact science as Mathematics and Physics, that is why I got my attention on P. Zheji as he connect them all together and linguistics in general do not have for instance Philosophic and Mathematical capabilities. But I totally understand that it is not time to introduce it in WP. --BenWeb13 (talk) 00:24, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , i understand where your coming from on the communist dictatorship and repression of academics. Arshi Pipa wrote this book The Politics of Language in Socialist Albania in 1989 on the subject, a sad read for Albanians on those issues. On other matters read Wilkes, its one of the most in depth studies on the Illyrians etc out there that has looked at scholarship from the former Yugoslavia, Albania and Western world. The parts about Albanians are interesting and not based on any nationalism. You might want to add some things from Wilkes to articles if you so wish in future on Albanians etc were relevant. But the important thing is do a lot of reading from a whole host of scholars and not just a few. Like that you will be well versed in the topic, important if you want to edit hot topics on Wikipedia going forward. Best.Resnjari (talk) 15:31, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , Thanks for reminding me of the Wilkes 'Illyrians' book. For my view is not primary concern if ancient scripts found are called Illyrian, Etruscan, Pelasgian, Hittite, Sumerian, Vinca, Lemnon, etc. Also, the theories and summery of one or another author are not my primary concern. What I like to see is the relation or comparison of words among languages regardless age or location. What I know from reading so far is that nobody including the best linguistic on earth have definite answers. I am OK if the Pre-Greek subtracts found to be called Illyrian or whatever. I am only saying that I like to see not only people like Ventri or the girl that started his work but anybody including Albanian researchers to compare and publish there work. I looking optimistic that the Albanian Academy of Science get soon restructured and be able to handle and influence the debate related the hot topics. I was just following a new research mentioning the Greek Etymologist G. Babiniotis and d his list of Greek words that originate from Albanian origin, while the Albanian Etymologist Kolec Topalli for same words is saying the revers or originating from Serbian or Indo-European subtract. So, definitely is something wrong with the Albanian Etymologist. After all comparison of words is not real etymology science. The Bible say: "In the beginning it was the word". For so long the etymologist have not even a definition of the 'word'. They do not get deep to understand how it is made. What motivates the word?! So, the question is can we freely run comparison tables? Let's say there are 4 or 5 autores who compare some words from old script and compare it with Albanian and or other languages? --BenWeb13 (talk) 00:17, 3 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , Austrian academics have done a study comparing various linguistic traits of the (old or proto) Albanian language with other Balkan languages, and links with Paleo-Balkan languages. The results are published in this book: Schumacher, Stefan & Joachim Matzinger. 2013. Die Verben des Altalbanischen. Belegwörter-buch, Vorgeschichte und Etymologie. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, . They have also published other journal articles based on their research etc like this one . The Albanian Academy of Sciences is underfunded and can not carry out such massive studies like the Austrians, even when there is an energy among Albanian academics to do so. Only these types of massive studies can examinations and comparisons occur to place Albanian in context to Paleo-Balkan languages. I think these sources will interest you much and they definitely do not touch on Pelasgian theories, thank goodness. Best.Resnjari (talk) 10:32, 3 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , Thanks for pointing it out the article in English, I can not read in German and will try to find some English articles. I noticed the references made to incompetent Albanian linguist Kolece Topalli (I guess if you make most of Albanian words originated from Serbo-Slavic than you easily considers reliable source). I am glade that Old-Albanian (for now only of 16-18th century) language is being considered and it is in fact interesting work to be read. Especial when the Balkan Nationalist Propaganda declares that Albanian language was made up after 18th century. So, I have not seen a list of known similar words from those Austrian researchers. (comment by User:BenWeb13, 3 Feb 2018)


 * , Since the new analytic methodology that I mention sound very odd, for understanding how the word are build and how it carries the message or motivation in it. I would like to give one example that you would easily understand : The Greek word ΠΑΡΑΔΟΣΗ 'Paradosi' = English 'Tradition'. 'Para+Dosi' contains 2 words that are used in both Albanian and Greek languages. 'Para' = From before, Gr. 'Dosi'/ Al. 'Dha'/ En. 'Give'. ('para' is consider non-Greek word by some authors). So, the meaning it carries is very close to the usage of this word. 'ParaDosi' = The tradition given (inherited) from before (past). In modern Albanian we use the word 'TRADIT' = en. 'Tradition'. With the new analyses: 'Tradit' = 'Tra + Dit' (ancient Albanian) = (modern Albanian) 'Tera + Dijet/Dituri' =  English 'All + Knowledge'. If we put side by side both Albanian and Greek word: 'TRADIT' + 'PARADOSI' = 'ALL the KNOLEDGE + INHERED FROM the PAST'. It is very interesting to find out how the words carry their own motivational meaning inside. (comment by User:BenWeb13, 3 Feb 2018)


 * Please sign your posts. I have asked before. This is really just basic housekeeping, and should not be hard to do.


 * Your personal research does not belong on Wikipedia, and your speculations do not belong on Talk pages. This includes a table of words you find "similar" or worth comparing. Wikipedia policy is very clear on this. Your idiosyncratic etymologies also don't belong in WP articles or for that matter in WP Talk pages. As Calthinus said a few days ago, the talk page is not a WP:FORUM.


 * You asked a direct question: "Can I attempt to contribute here or not?" I will give you a direct answer: "No". Your knowledge of linguistics is inadequate for the topic and despite a great deal of patient explanation by many experienced WP editors, you still don't seem to understand the fundamental WP concept of neutral point of view, including basing articles on reliable sources. Maybe if you continue your reading in a variety of sources (not just Albanian nationalist ones), you will be able to contribute constructively in the future. I'm sorry to say this, because I really believe in helping new editors learn the ropes, but these long long discussions are a waste of everyone's time. --Macrakis (talk) 18:40, 3 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , OK, I was not going to ask you more question. As I promise I am reading all the WP templates that you and others have provided. I am sorry if I mistypes or forgot the signature that is due to my new eyeglasses. :) I only remembered 1 example what what the new methodology looks like, just for the sake of understanding what I was talking about. We talked about many theories and many different resources. I am sure that nobody would be able to now all knowledge and all WP rules at once. Especially when there are so many hot topics with hundreds of authors old and new that apparently are banned out of WP. With that only 1 (one) example I only meant for you to understand what I was talking about when I referred a new Author and his methodology, and did not mean to turn it into 'Forum'. That had nothing to do with the Pelasgian theories and or Pre-Greek subtracts. So, I am reading the books suggested and also the WP rule templates. Also I will re-read this conversation to refresh my memory of the great advice you all made. Thank you. --BenWeb13 (talk) 19:21, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , Kolec Topalli is a good linguist, i have his work Fonetika Historike e Gjuhes Shqipe (2007) and he is respected in the linguistic community on his studies regarding Albanian. Lets not taint academics because we might not agree with them. If there is a scholarly critique by other scholars of a scholar then cite it, but otherwise best not to engage in mudslinging of a scholar for no reason by saying they are "incompetent". I agree with Macrakis that your not yet ready to edit topics of this complex nature yet though i have hope in you that in future you might be able and as such wish you the best in reading thoroughly the many sources. Best.Resnjari (talk) 20:57, 3 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , FYI, since you ask me to clarify my opinion about K. Topalli with a citation. As I mention earlier comparing 2 authores with their ethymologic dictionaries: Georgios Babiniotis (in Greek) and Kolec Topalli (in Albanian). I will take for example the Albanian word 'fara' in English 'seed'. In Greek word 'φαρα' ('fara') in English 'tribe, seed'. G. Babiniotis define it as the Greek word originate from the Albanian language. While K. Topalli define the Albanian word as derived from Indo-European fund. This goes on for many words, and to be sincere neither have with me the dictionaries at the moment and neither want to turn this into a forum. But I mention only one example as a response and you may be able to verify it for us. I also like to add that with this example comparison I prove myself not to judge authors and their theories based on 'nationalistic' point of view. As I give utmost respect for the G. Babiniotis who is not considered 'Albanian nationalist'. I could not say the same with someone else who declares 'nationalistic' a new theory or methodology simply because is pioneered by an Albanian authors and while the Albanian intellectuals and Robert Elsie give utmost evaluation but there are more pending review (to my current knowledge). I do not think is fair the reaction when I only bring one example demonstrating a new theory while being targeted as bringing 'nationalistic' theories and turning the discussion about Albanian language into a forum. I remind you that this discussion are about Albanian language page. Thanks. --BenWeb13 (talk) 16:49, 4 February 2018 (UTC), Added the Bikileksiko link for word φαρα 'fara'.  --BenWeb13 (talk) 17:31, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , you said Topalli is "incompetent" (based on ???). The two examples you have given are not in contradiction. Babiniotis gives the word fara in Greek as being a borrowing from Albanian. ok fine. Topalli gives the word fara in Albanian as being derived from an Indo-European base. Where is the issue? The Albanian language is an independent branch of the Indo-European language family from where it derives. Many thousands of years ago there was a common Indo-European language and as people from that group migrated here or there it evolved into many other language families retaining characteristics of the mother language but changing in many, many aspects. It’s why Albanian is related to Germanic, Celtic, Romance, Slavic and other such language families, but different enough to be recognnised as unique in its own right. Pelasgian theories are based on pseudo-science (see: De Rapper). A few Albanian academics and others such as Arvanite folklorists (Aristidh Kola) etc are fringe and other editors will contest their addition especially if its about Pelasgians. Also i never said that those Albanian academics that refer to the Pelasgian theories are nationalistic. I don't know their personal views (unless there is evidence to the contrary -something they might have said or written), what i do know is that when they make claims regarding Pelasgians in relation to Albanians or Illyrians etc its fringe. Do the suggested readings and seek out more information, very important if you want to edit complex articles like this. Best.Resnjari (talk) 17:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , I see a tendency for you to repeat and mix theories again and again and not getting to main conclusion. Then, I am the one being tagged as turning it into a forum. I stopped talking about 'Pelasgian' theories. When I said in the last comment that I am being targeted as referring to Albanian nationalist theories, it was related to an example that relates to the new Etymological methodology who's pioneer is P. Zheji (again nothing to do with 'Pelasgian' theories mention). I am referring to a well known Greek Etymologist and showing you an also considered Albanian approved author that for Etymology study is 'incompetent' to say at least. Because K.Topalli could read more experience etymologies before trying to find Albanian words origin else where. I see that it is your professor you trying to defend his work. So, I have to take another example. The Greek word τσούπρα originate from Albanian 'çupë' (from Babiniotis) which in English 'girl, maid'. While K. Topalli in his book say Albanian word 'çupë' originate from Serbian word 'cupra' meaning "bunch of uncombed hair". Again, the new methodology helps out in this case when 2 or more linguistics finds similarity among words of different languages and are not able to define its origin correctly. They recognize the comparison theories used by recognized Etymologist but go deep into analyzing the word itself to find out how it is build before stating its origin. Best. --BenWeb13 (talk) 18:16, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , experienced editors went through the issues you raised and addressed them. Its up to you about whether you want to take on board advice and suggestions or continue as you wish. If you make edits about adding Pelasgian theories you will be reverted, if you persist then you may then be up for sanctions for placing fringe material. That's all. I wish you the best with things.Resnjari (talk) 18:50, 4 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , OK, I already told you so many times that I ma not talking about 'Pelasgian' theories since I got you advice. You keep switching the conversation their when I talk for something else, like the similar words that are used in Greek and Albanian, also existing new methodologies for defining their origin. My whole conversation here is to clarify and take your advice on all hot topics concerning the Albanian language and contribution based on qualifying or approved authors. Since I accepted your guidelines and expressed will to review all advice as expressed here, I do not see why you conclude: "Its up to you about whether you want to take on board advice and suggestions or continue as you wish."?! I do not see if something is up to me at all. I repeat that for all new contributors like myself would be great to discuss the hot topics and the sources as relate to WP rules. Regardless, I thank you for your time to answer as much as you did. Best. --BenWeb13 (talk) 19:25, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , ok since you refered to me mixing theories etc. Babiniotis looked at words in Greek that came from Albanian or Alvanika/Arvanitika and refered to their source. That was the basis of his research and study. Topalli research is on where words such as çupë in Albanian come from, are they from proto-Albanian or some other language. In this instance he linked it as a borrowing from Slavic. In the end neither Babiniotis or Topalli are in contradiction. Unless you bring a scholarly source that says so and so scholar is wrong, editors are not going to have a discussion here about each word in Albanian, its time consuming and the results are geared toward ? Do the reading and then come back some time from now when you want to add something or more to the article with strong and well grounded references. As editors here we have done much to engage with you, there are other editors out there who would not spend the time or effort to do so and instead allow for you to make edits that then they could use to sanction you for disruptive editing or even edit warring. You have an energy, channel it by doing lots of reading on a subject which i see your passionate about, then you will be ready to edit this type of topic and make great contributions. I know i have come off a bit harsh, but better this now then you joining the long queue of blocked and banned editors to Balkan topics and wondering after how that happened. Overall I wish you the best.Resnjari (talk) 19:43, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Semantic shift of Indo-European words in Albanian?
In the section about the Indo-European origins of Albanian, it's mentioned that some Albanian words have undergone semantic shift and it is given the word 'motër', meaning sister. I think this is a little exaggerated. The family titles like mother, father, brother, sister did not originate with the meaning that we apply to them today. For example, literally translated, father < pIE *pəh₂- (to protect) + *-ters (agent suffix) means 'protector'; mother < pIE *meh₂- (to care for, to nurture) + *-ters means 'caretaker'; sister < *swe- (self) + *h₁ésh₂r̥ (blood) means 'someone of the same blood' (i.e. sibling); etc. Based on this, it's not accurate to postulate that pIE *meh₂ters > Alb. 'motër' necessarily meant mother in proto-Indo-European and is an example of semantic shift. It meant caretaker which easily could have become maid in Albanian (and later elder sister > sister); respectively, mother in most other Indo-European languages. This is an example of divergent semantology, not of "semantic shift". Bezimenen (talk) 12:16, 31 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Bring source/s for this and then we can have a discussion and proceed, otherwise its just speculation. Best.Resnjari (talk) 07:47, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Non Indo-European traces
I don't have too much time at hand but I think that article needs a section on that. For example vigesimal system is not an Indo-European feature. It is well developed in Basque related areas and in Albanian. There also some old Albanian words of non IE origin Aigest (talk) 12:35, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Lots of IE languages have the remnants of vigesimal systems: French, Danish, Welsh, Breton, Scottish Gaelic, the Resian dialect of Slovenian. There is also English "four score and seven" (87) and 20 shillings to the pound. --John Cowan (talk) 01:31, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

The chart with words in Albanian and other languages seems to be incorrect with the color yellow. Albanian for Yellow is the column header and the English is yellow, but the old Slavonic is green. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.149.12.61 (talk) 19:46, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Removing poorly sourced/outdated section
I'm going to remove the current "Old Albanian" section, which solely deals with a research proposal from 2008, which was aiming to prove a seminal influence of Albanian on the formation of the Balkan sprachbund. This section is insufficiently sourced and giving WP:UNDUE weight to a hypothesis that's not an established mainstream view – in fact, as currently sourced, it's not even a "hypothesis" at all, just a working guess of some researchers that they wanted to establish ten years ago. If anything came from this, we should be able to cite the actual published results of those studies by now. The whole idea is also somewhat of an "extraordinary" or at least surprising claim that would need extraordinarily good sourcing, since its basic premise would prima facie seem almost impossible to prove. Most of the crucial structural features of the Balkan sprachbund, including the postponed articles that are mentioned prominently in our text here, are documented in other languages of the group (e.g. Bulgarian) even before Albanian as a whole was first attested, so if there's any possible method of showing that Albanian must have had them first, that method is at least not an obvious one.

The whole section is also misplaced; if anywhere, it would belong under the "history" heading. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:50, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

90% of alb. vocabulary = loanwords?
Professor Robert McColl Millar is not even an Albanologist and his claim (that "90% of alb. Vocabulary SEEM to be replaced by Latin/Greek/etc") is still found here. I don't find this neutral at all. It's not even a fact, but an old claim (which has been proven to be wrong) that this professor brought up, again. LAGTON (talk) 19:10, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there. If you can provide a source which suggests the opposite, unlike what Millar is saying, then it could perhaps be removed/more probably altered. Please elaborate on the ‘proven to be wrong’ bit. ArbDardh (talk) 20:52, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I made a small change in accordance with Millar as the previous version of the article did not say exactly what he says in his study. I agree with ArbDardh that reliable sources are needed to make changes to the article. If I am not mistaken, I have read somewhere that some 50% of Albanian words stem from Latin loans. I do not see anything wrong with Millar's conclusions. is more aware of academic consensus on the topic than I am though. Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:39, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I have Millar's book, and remember this statement -- it's likely true. But it should be placed in context. Only some 10 ish % (I think I read 15% somewhere? Some words are disputed, like kater--4) of Albanian vocabulary is inherited from Indo-European, i.e. continuous usage for some 6 millenia. The vast majority of Albanian vocabulary has still been in the language for at least 1000 years as the biggest chunk of foreign vocab happened from Latin during the Roman period and immediate followup. Albanian is a language where many loans replaced native vocab, but it is not the only one -- English is full of more recent loans from Romance (more recent than Albanian that is -- many of these have been in English quite awhile, plus English [|loaned an entire personal pronoun] from Norse); Armenian was so heavily Persianized it was mistaken for an Iranian language for quite some time. What we need is a way to say this that is not SYNTHy. --Calthinus (talk) 04:39, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Page 203 Millar also says the native vocab of Albanian consists of less than 200 words. This is disputable as once again there are cases where we aren't sure -- kater, qen, etc -- but this is a figure that is often reported in literature and not just some bs. As I said above-- this should be qualified and it will be more informative once we can gather sources explaining how this came to be.--Calthinus (talk) 04:45, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * In contrast Demiraj, cited by Klein/Joseph/Fritz -- has 572 native Albanian lexemes, which is significantly higher obviously [] --Calthinus (talk) 06:00, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Good idea . The conclusions of Demiraj and Millar on the number of native words also would be great additions to the article. I will try to find sources that might help to enrich the article but I do not expect much from myself. Few people have sufficient knowledge of linguistics. It is a difficult field. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:05, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

History of the language
This is a well documented source on the written historical documents on Albanian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gore Voinicescu (talk • contribs) 10:12, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

language isolation
I think it could be in the best interest that we should talk about the language isolation that happened from the reign of communism in albania. -Kinukram
 * If you have Reliable Sources on this matter, then by all means, bring them to the table.50.111.51.247 (talk) 06:47, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

3rd most spoken language in Italy
footnote 28 refers to foreign citizens. --142.163.194.244 (talk) 00:01, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Unique/'deadend' branches of Indo-European
"Albanian is considered an isolate within the Indo-European language family; no other language has been conclusively linked to its branch. The only other language that is the sole surviving member of a branch of Indo-European is Armenian."

What about Greek?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.119.64.24 (talk) 11:39, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Ancient Greek entries
I have removed entries which have several competing etymologies:
 * verë<oinos according to Huld (1984), but Orel (1998 p.500) attributes it to EPAlb *waina cognate to oinos.
 * shpellë as indicated by the shp<sp comes Latin intermediary spelaeum (Orel 1998, p.428).
 * bredh<brathy per Huld (1984). Newer studies by Orel (1998/2000), Demiraj (1997) connect to an EPAlb formation.
 * angari<aggareia per Huld (1984). I have removed this term, because the formation is Hellenistic Greek, not Macedonian and Albanian angari is probably not even a Hellenistic borrowing, but a medieval one from some northern Greek dialect as ng<gg indicates.
 * I have used Huld (1984) in the past, but my evolving opinion is that it should be used only when corroborated by other studies. In the same paper Huld etymologies modern Pojan (near Apollonia) as an Adriatic Illyrian derivation of Apollonia which entered Albanian. This proposed etymology by Huld to me showed that Huld had very little real knowledge of Albanian or the Balkan language area. Pojan (field) is just a Slavic toponym as the hundreds of Pojan<Poljane/Polje/-polje around the Balkans highlight. Just next to Pojan is the equivalent Albanian toponym Fushë.
 * is a highly reliable source for ancient Greek and Albanian contacts.--Maleschreiber (talk) 20:38, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Phonology
The Albanian–PIE correspondences list moves from PIE to Albanian with no intermediate phase. This doesn't help readers understand why Albanian phonology has developed specific vowels and sonorants. I think that it is more sensible to include a table which progresses from PIE to PPAlb to PAlb to MoAlb (Phonology of Albanian (HSK Indo-European Linguistics 41.3)) Thoughts? --Maleschreiber (talk) 16:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Many details are in Proto-Albanian language. Maybe a further-hatnote at the beginning of the section would help to guide the reader who wants to know more about it. –Austronesier (talk) 19:16, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree but I have no time personally to implement this. Note that the page Proto-Albanian currently uses Orel's framework, not De Vaan's. In practice, though, the difference is mostly in terminology. --Calthinus (talk) 00:12, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Table messed up beyond recognition
The table here is messed up beyond recognition. Can someone repair it? It should show IMO only real cognates with English translations in quotes when there is a significant semantic shift.

The table shows Latin flavus as meaning blue, whereas I had always thought it meant yellow, and caeruleus blue, and it is used as a colour of hair. However there may be some explanation I don't know about, as I am far out of my depth here, "not waving but drowning". Esedowns (talk) 14:58, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Albanian terms of grammatical cases and reinstatement of unrelated reference
Hello. In this edit summary you claim that the Albanian terms of the grammatical cases are useful, and that this is a standard practice in other articles as well. Can you share examples of other articles about languages, where the corresponding foreign terms are used?

Furthermore, you reinstated the reference to Beekes (2011, p. 25), even though the author makes no mention of vocative or locative examples. I explained this in my edit summary (diff), and was subsequently fixed by (diff). Please revert only when necessary; you could have performed a partial revert in this case. Demetrios1993 (talk) 22:37, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't have an example regarding grammatical cases, but here, |vrapoj on the "conjugation" section, you can see the analogy. As for Beeks, it was a mistake and I apologize for that. FierakuiVërtet (talk) 06:56, 15 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Or under mal (Wiktionary), the Albanian name for the cases are listed when you click on "declension of mal" AlexBachmann (talk) 20:26, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not Wiktionary. It is practical there, but might be distracting/bloating here. We generally don't have translations for common grammatical terminology like cases or tenses. It may be useful to mention traditional terms for language-specific phenomena (like maṣdar in Arabic grammar or stød in Danish phonology), but not for common things like nominative case or past tense. As a rule thumb, let's do what reliable sources do: if Albanian descriptive grammars or overviews (which are not necessarily aimed at language learners) written in English commonly mention things like emërore etc. we may do so too; and vice versa. After a cursory inspection of some sources for a general (= general linguistic) readership, I don't see it's a common practice. –Austronesier (talk) 16:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I would tend to agree with Austronesier -- Albanian names only for Albanian-specific phenomena. In terms of its cases, well, Albanian's cases are anything but specifically Albanian, they follow a pretty general pattern seen in many European, and especially Balkan, languages.--Calthinus (talk) 16:36, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, i get your point and i am in favour of reverting my edit. Let's wait and see if has something to add. FierakuiVërtet (talk) 17:14, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, I agree with you. AlexBachmann (talk) 18:17, 16 October 2022 (UTC)