This appears to be a non-standard view of yours, and it's odd that you object to Razib using the term "Slavic" rather than following your idiosyncratic naming. I mean, if some ancient language is the source of all modern Slavic language, isn't it incorrect to identify that with a modern language? Italian is not Latin, after all.
This appears to be a non-standard view of yours, and it's odd that you object to Razib using the term "Slavic" rather than following your idiosyncratic naming. I mean, if some ancient language is the source of all modern Slavic language, isn't it incorrect to identify that with a modern language? Italian is not Latin, after all.
What is the ‘standard’? Many history falsifications are still ‘standards’. I do not object the term ‘Slavic’ after the 7th c.AC, but it cannot be used for earlier periods, for e.g. when Aryans came to SA. The modern Serbian language is a direct descendant of Vinca language. When exactly the ancient Vinca language, which was developing during the Ice Age and thousands of years after that, can be named ‘Serbian’? It is a bit longer story, I may write about this, but I propose that would be a moment when a consonant group SRB was created (Srb or Srbin is how Serbs call themselves and their language). The beginning of the proto-language was a creation of minimum consonant groups (one or two consonants) and from there, by creating new words which used these consonants as kernels, modern languages were created. It is possible to see which languages were organically and directly created from this proto-language and which are artificial so as Latin and sc. ‘ancient’ Greek are. Sc. ‘Indo-European’ i.e. Yamnaya language could not be a language which influenced all Euro and many Asian languages. I wrote about this. We simply do not know where Yamnaya people lived before 3100BC and where and when this, sc. IE language had its Proto-phase which probably had to be minimum several thousands of years long. I already presented some things when I was writing about the meaning of Rg and Veda.
Yep, all of them, since Russian (8th c.AC) up to the politically constructed Bosnian (25 years ago). This Proto-Slavic can be also called Proto-Sanskrit or Indo-European or simply Serbian. Using the ‘proto’ methodology, we write these comments in Proto-Martian how citizens of Mars will call this language in 200 years.
Why would anyone other than you call it "Serbian"? And we in America call our language "English" not "American", thus the English did not speak "proto-American".
Because it was the name of the language for several thousands of years, spoken in continuity up to today by people who called themselves Serbs and which has the oldest alphabet. Can you propose the name of this language apart from this backdated Proto-Slavic?
It's just you claiming that, and I have no reason to believe you. My understanding is that the first Slavic alphabet was Glagolitic, though it was designed by Greeks. Bulgarians created Cyrillic, though the name of the name used for the written language is Old Church Slavonic.
This appears to be a non-standard view of yours, and it's odd that you object to Razib using the term "Slavic" rather than following your idiosyncratic naming. I mean, if some ancient language is the source of all modern Slavic language, isn't it incorrect to identify that with a modern language? Italian is not Latin, after all.
What is the ‘standard’? Many history falsifications are still ‘standards’. I do not object the term ‘Slavic’ after the 7th c.AC, but it cannot be used for earlier periods, for e.g. when Aryans came to SA. The modern Serbian language is a direct descendant of Vinca language. When exactly the ancient Vinca language, which was developing during the Ice Age and thousands of years after that, can be named ‘Serbian’? It is a bit longer story, I may write about this, but I propose that would be a moment when a consonant group SRB was created (Srb or Srbin is how Serbs call themselves and their language). The beginning of the proto-language was a creation of minimum consonant groups (one or two consonants) and from there, by creating new words which used these consonants as kernels, modern languages were created. It is possible to see which languages were organically and directly created from this proto-language and which are artificial so as Latin and sc. ‘ancient’ Greek are. Sc. ‘Indo-European’ i.e. Yamnaya language could not be a language which influenced all Euro and many Asian languages. I wrote about this. We simply do not know where Yamnaya people lived before 3100BC and where and when this, sc. IE language had its Proto-phase which probably had to be minimum several thousands of years long. I already presented some things when I was writing about the meaning of Rg and Veda.
All Slavic languages would be "direct descendants" of proto-Slavic.
Yep, all of them, since Russian (8th c.AC) up to the politically constructed Bosnian (25 years ago). This Proto-Slavic can be also called Proto-Sanskrit or Indo-European or simply Serbian. Using the ‘proto’ methodology, we write these comments in Proto-Martian how citizens of Mars will call this language in 200 years.
Why would anyone other than you call it "Serbian"? And we in America call our language "English" not "American", thus the English did not speak "proto-American".
Because it was the name of the language for several thousands of years, spoken in continuity up to today by people who called themselves Serbs and which has the oldest alphabet. Can you propose the name of this language apart from this backdated Proto-Slavic?
It's just you claiming that, and I have no reason to believe you. My understanding is that the first Slavic alphabet was Glagolitic, though it was designed by Greeks. Bulgarians created Cyrillic, though the name of the name used for the written language is Old Church Slavonic.