{"history":[],"article":{"id":"b86c2113-9c0e-402c-a4d5-b7f70445102f","title":"Proto-Albanian language","slug":"proto-albanian-language","content":":::summary\n**Name:** Proto-Albanian \n**Region:** Western Balkans \n**Era:** c. 1000 BCE – 600 CE \n**Familycolor:** Indo-European \n**Notes:** The only survivor of the [Albanoid](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanoid) languages of the [Paleo-Balkan group](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) \n**Ancestor:** [Proto-Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european-language) \n**Ancestor 2:** Proto-Albanoid \n**Target:** [Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language) ([dialects](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-dialects)) \n**Child 1:** Proto-[Gheg](https://bliptext.com/articles/gheg-albanian) \n**Child 2:** Proto-[Tosk](https://bliptext.com/articles/tosk-albanian) \n:::\n\n# \n**Proto-[Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language)** is the ancestral [reconstructed](https://bliptext.com/articles/linguistic-reconstruction) language of [Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language), before the [Gheg](https://bliptext.com/articles/gheg-albanian)–[Tosk](https://bliptext.com/articles/tosk-albanian) dialectal diversification (before c. 600 CE).\n[Albanoid](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanoid) and other [Paleo-Balkan languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) had their formative core in the [Balkans](https://bliptext.com/articles/balkans) after the [Indo-European migrations](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-european-migrations) in the region.\nWhether descendants or sister languages of what was called [Illyrian](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrian-language) by classical sources, Albanian and [Messapic](https://bliptext.com/articles/messapic-language), on the basis of shared features and innovations, are grouped together in a [common branch](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanoid) in the current phylogenetic classification of the [Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-european-languages) language family.\nThe precursor of Albanian can be considered a completely formed independent IE language since at least the first millennium BCE, with the beginning of the early Proto-Albanian phase.\nProto-Albanian is reconstructed by way of the [comparative method](https://bliptext.com/articles/comparative-method) between the [Tosk](https://bliptext.com/articles/tosk-albanian) and [Gheg](https://bliptext.com/articles/gheg-albanian) dialects and between Albanian and other Indo-European languages, as well as through [contact linguistics](https://bliptext.com/articles/contact-linguistics) studying early [loanwords](https://bliptext.com/articles/loanword) from and into Albanian and [structural](https://bliptext.com/articles/language-structure) and [phonological](https://bliptext.com/articles/phonology) convergences with other languages.\nLoanwords into Albanian treated through its phonetic evolution can be traced back as early as the first contacts with [Doric Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/doric-greek) (West Greek) since the 7th century BCE, but the most important of which are those from Latin (dated by De Vaan to the period 167 BCE to 400 CE) and from [Slavic](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-languages) (dated from 600 CE onward).\nThe evidence from loanwords allows linguists to construct in great detail the shape of native words at the points of major influxes of loans from well-attested languages.\nIn historical linguistics Proto-Albanian is broken up into different stages which are usually delimited by the onset of contact with different well-attested languages.\nPre-Proto-Albanian is the early stage of the precursor of Albanian during the first millennium BCE, marked by contacts with Ancient Greek, but not yet by contacts with Latin.\nProto-Albanian proper is dated to the period of contacts with Latin, starting from the 2nd century BCE after the [Roman](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-republic) conquest of the Western Balkans, but the major Latin influence occurred since the first years of the common era when the Western Balkans were eventually incorporated into the [Roman](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-republic) Empire.\nCommon Albanian or its two dialects, Proto-Gheg and Proto-Tosk, experienced the earliest contacts with South Slavic languages since the [Slavic migrations to the Balkans](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-migrations-to-the-balkans) in the 6th–7th centuries CE.\nThe rise of Tosk from Proto-Albanian was prompted before Slavic contacts circa 600 CE, as evidenced by the fact that Latin and [ancient Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-greek) loanwords are treated like native words with regard to taxonomical differences between Gheg and Tosk, but the same is not true of Slavic loans.\n\n# History\n[Albanoid](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanoid) and other [Paleo-Balkan languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) had their formative core in the [Balkans](https://bliptext.com/articles/balkans) after the [Indo-European migrations](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-european-migrations) in the region about 3000 to 2500 BCE.\nThey replaced the [pre-Indo-European languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/pre-indo-european-languages), which left traces of the Mediterranean-Balkan substratum.\nShortly after they had diverged from one another, Pre-Albanian, Pre-Greek, and Pre-Armenian underwent a longer period of contact, as shown by common correspondences that are irregular for other IE languages.\nFurthermore, intense Greek–Albanian contacts have continued thereafter.\nThe precursor of Albanian can be considered a completely formed independent IE language since at least the first millennium BCE, with the beginning of the early Proto-Albanian phase.\nThe precursor of Albanian is often thought to have been an [Illyrian language](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrian-languages) for obvious geographic and historical reasons as well as for some linguistic evidence,\nIn classical antiquity Proto-Albanian was spoken in the central-western part of the Balkan Peninsula, to the north and west of the [Ancient Greeks](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-greeks), as shown by early [Doric Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/doric-greek) (West Greek) and [Ancient Macedonian](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-macedonian-language) loanwords that were treated with characteristic Albanian features, by classical [place names](https://bliptext.com/articles/place-names) exclusively observing Albanian accent and phonetic rules, as well as by several Proto-Albanian items preserved in ancient glossaries.\n\n## Contacts with Ancient Greek\nProto-Albanian speech came into contact in its earlier stage with Ancient Greek since the 7th century BCE, when the [Greek colonies](https://bliptext.com/articles/greek-colonisation) were founded on the Adriatic coast of Albania.\nIn that period early loanwords were borrowed from [Doric Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/doric-greek) (West Greek), either directly from the colonists or indirectly through trade communication in the hinterland.\nDuring the 5th–4th centuries BCE Proto-Albanian directly loaned words from [Ancient Macedonian](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-macedonian-language), at a time when this language [gained prominence](https://bliptext.com/articles/rise-of-macedon) in the region and was not yet replaced by [Koine Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/koine-greek).\nSeveral Proto-Albanian terms have been preserved in the lexicon of [Hesychius of Alexandria](https://bliptext.com/articles/hesychius-of-alexandria) and other ancient glossaries.\nSome of the Proto-Albanian glosses in Hesychius are considered to have been loaned to the Dorik Greek as early as the 7th century BCE.\nEvidence of a significant level of early [linguistic contact](https://bliptext.com/articles/linguistic-contact) between Albanian and Greek is provided by ancient common [structural](https://bliptext.com/articles/language-structure) innovations and [phonologic](https://bliptext.com/articles/phonology) convergence such as:\nThose innovations are limited only to the Albanian and Greek languages and are not shared with other languages of the [Balkan sprachbund](https://bliptext.com/articles/balkan-sprachbund).\nSince they precede the Balkan sprachbund era, those innovations date to a prehistoric phase of the Albanian language, spoken at that time in the same area as Greek and within a social frame of bilingualism among early Albanians having to be able to speak some form of Greek.\n\n## Contacts with Latin, Romance, and Middle Greek\nProto-Albanian came into contact with [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin) since the [Illyro–Roman wars](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyro-roman-wars) in the late 3rd and early 2nd centuries BCE, when the [Roman Republic](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-republic) defeated the [Illyrians](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrians) and began to establish its rule in the Western Balkans, gradually consolidating its dominion during the last two centuries BCE.\nBut the major Latin influence in Proto-Albanian occurred since the first years of the common era, when the Western Balkans were eventually incorporated into the [Roman Empire](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-empire) after the Great Illyrian Revolt of 6–9 CE ([Bellum Batonianum](https://bliptext.com/articles/bellum-batonianum)).\nThe Latin loanwords in Proto-Albanian were borrowed through the entire period of spoken Latin in the Western Balkans (c. 167 BCE–400 CE), reflecting different chronological layers and penetrating, without any restrictions, into virtually all semantic fields.\nEven the basic [Christian](https://bliptext.com/articles/christianity) terms are of Latin origin, and since they entered Proto-Albanian before the Gheg–Tosk dialectal diversification, the Proto-Albanian speakers were [christianized](https://bliptext.com/articles/christianized) under the Latin sphere of influence, specifically in the 4th century CE.\n[Historical linguistic](https://bliptext.com/articles/historical-linguistic) considerations indicate that the Roman province of [Moesia Superior](https://bliptext.com/articles/moesia), and more specifically the ancient region of [Dardania](https://bliptext.com/articles/dardani) and adjacent zones, constitute the best candidate for the area where Proto-Albanian received its major Latin influence, and where intensive contacts between Proto-Albanian and [Proto-Romance](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-romance) occurred, eventually producing the shared innovations between Tosk Albanian and [(Proto-)Romanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-romanian-language).\nThose innovations ultimately prompted the rise of Tosk from Proto-Albanian, a diversification that began not later than the 6th–7th centuries CE (i.e. before the period of contacts with Slavic).\nGheg Albanian was already separated from the Albanian–(Proto-)Romanian contact zone at an earlier period.\nToponymy provides evidence that Albanian was already spoken since late antiquity in northern and central Albania, but not yet in southern Albania (south of the [Shkumbin](https://bliptext.com/articles/shkumbin) river).\nThose considerations indicate that unlike Gheg, the Tosk dialect could not yet have already occupied its historical geographic distribution in late antiquity.\nOn the other hand, the multi-layered Albanian dialects in western North Macedonia provide evidence that the area was inhabited by Albanian-speakers since antiquity.\nThe historical geographic spread of the Albanian dialects as it appeared in medieval times is considered to have been shaped by the [settlement of Slavic farmers](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-migrations-to-the-balkans) from the 6th–7th centuries CE.\nDuring the centuries of the [Great Migration Period](https://bliptext.com/articles/migration-period) in the Roman Empire after the 3rd century CE, the Imperial structures progressively weakened and eventually collapsed.\nProto-Albanian and Proto-Romanian speakers remained in close contact for a substantial time frame as mountain [pastoralists](https://bliptext.com/articles/pastoralism).\nThe fact that the Albanian language reflects a clear pastoralist stage does not allow conclusions about the Proto-Albanian speakers' way of life during classical antiquity, as only the speech of the mountain pastoralists managed to survive the Great Migrations.\nIt has been suggested that the Latin influence on Albanian resulted from a urbanized way of life, which was followed by a flight from towns similar to what occurred to the Eastern-Romance speakers.\nNevertheless, the extensive influence of the Albanian language on the pastoral vocabulary and its influence, albeit lower, on the [crop cultivation](https://bliptext.com/articles/crop-cultivation) vocabulary, in Eastern Romance languages, indicate that Proto-Albanian speakers were already leading a pastoral lifestyle at the time when Latin speakers assumed the same way of life, borrowing from (Proto-)Albanian a number of technical terms.\nThe post-Roman contact zone between Albanian and Common Romanian is considered to have been located in [Dardania](https://bliptext.com/articles/dardania-roman-province) and adjacent areas.\nFrom this contact the Tosk Albanian dialect is considered to have received the first impetus of developments that were shared with Eastern Romance and that did not affect the Gheg Albanian dialect as it had already separated in earlier times.\nAfter a period of common innovations, but before the rise of the [rhotacism](https://bliptext.com/articles/rhotacism) n > r (which preceded contacts with Slavic from c. 600 CE), speakers of Eastern Romance varieties that were not yet affected by this fundamental sound change separated from the Tosk Albanian–Common Romanian contact zone.\nIn a period that followed the rise of those innovations, Tosk Albanian is considered to have moved – driven by the offensive of the Slavs – to Albania south of the [Shkumbin](https://bliptext.com/articles/shkumbin) river in its historically documented location.\nAt the time of the South Slavic incursion and the threat of ethnic turbulence in the Albanian-inhabited regions, the Christianization of the Albanians had already been completed and it had apparently developed for Albanians as a further identity-forming feature alongside the ethnic-linguistic unity.\nChurch administration, which was controlled by a thick network of Roman bishoprics, collapsed with the arrival of the Slavs.\nBetween the early 7th century and the late 9th century the interior areas of the Balkans were deprived of church administration, and Christianity might have survived only as a popular tradition on a reduced degree.\nThe reorganization of the Church as a cult institution in the region took a considerable amount of time, as the Balkans were brought back into the Christian orbit only after the recovery of the [Byzantine Empire](https://bliptext.com/articles/byzantine-empire) and through the activity of Byzantine missionaries.\nThe earliest ascertained church vocabulary of [Middle Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/middle-greek) origin in Albanian dates to the 8th–9th centuries, at the time of the [Byzantine Iconoclasm](https://bliptext.com/articles/byzantine-iconoclasm), which was started by the Byzantine Emperor [Leo III the Isaurian](https://bliptext.com/articles/leo-iii-the-isaurian).\nIn 726 Leo III established [de jure](https://bliptext.com/articles/de-jure) the jurisdiction of the [Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople](https://bliptext.com/articles/ecumenical-patriarchate-of-constantinople) over the Balkans, as the Church and the State established an institution.\nThe Eastern Church expanded its influence in the area along with the social and political developments.\nBetween the 7th and 12th centuries a powerful network of cult institutions were revived completely covering the ecclesiastical administration of the entire present-day Albanian-speaking compact area.\nIn particular an important role was played by the [Theme of Dyrrhachium](https://bliptext.com/articles/theme-of-dyrrhachium) and the [Archdiocese of Ohrid](https://bliptext.com/articles/archdiocese-of-ohrid).\nThe lack of [Old Church Slavonic](https://bliptext.com/articles/old-church-slavonic) terms in Albanian Christian terminology shows that the missionary activities during the [Christianization of the Slavs](https://bliptext.com/articles/christianization-of-the-slavs) did not involve Albanian-speakers, indeed, the Christian belief among Albanians had survived through the centuries and already become an important cultural element in their ethnic identity.\n# [The Roman province of Moesia Superior (in red), which included ancient Dardania, is considered as the best candidate for the area where Proto-Albanian received its major Latin influence, and where it experienced intensive contacts with Proto-Romance during the post-Latin period, which eventually produced the Tosk Albanian–(Proto)Romanian innovations that prompted the rise of Tosk from Proto-Albanian. | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/RomanEmpire///117///-///Moesia///Superior///and///Moesia///Inferior.svg]\n\n## Earliest contacts with South Slavic\nWhen the [Slavic-speaking farmers migrated](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-migrations-to-the-balkans) to the Balkans and settled the plains from the 6th–7th centruries CE, they encountered [Albania](https://bliptext.com/articles/albania)n-speaking Indo-Europeans and assimilated part of them, but the language of the [Albania](https://bliptext.com/articles/albania)ns who had taken refuge in the mountainous areas of present-day northern and central [Albania](https://bliptext.com/articles/albania), eastern [Montenegro](https://bliptext.com/articles/montenegro), western [North Macedonia](https://bliptext.com/articles/north-macedonia), and [Kosovo](https://bliptext.com/articles/kosovo), managed to survive the Great Migrations.\nLeading a [pastoral](https://bliptext.com/articles/pastoralism) lifestyle and although separated from Slavic-speakers, Albanian-speakers were not isolated, and contacts between Albanian and Slavic occurred thereafter.\nIn particular, Tosk Albanian came into contact with [Eastern South Slavic](https://bliptext.com/articles/eastern-south-slavic) dialects, and Gheg Albanian with [Western South Slavic](https://bliptext.com/articles/western-south-slavic) dialects.\nEarly long-standing contacts between Slavic-speakers and Albanian-speakers might have been common in mountain passages and agriculture or fishing areas, such as the valleys of the [White](https://bliptext.com/articles/white-drin) and [Black](https://bliptext.com/articles/black-drin) branches of the [Drin](https://bliptext.com/articles/drin-river) and around the [Shkodër](https://bliptext.com/articles/lake-shkod-r) and [Ohrid](https://bliptext.com/articles/ohrid) lakes.\nSuch contacts in these areas caused many changes in Slavic and Albanian local varieties.\nAs Albanian and South Slavic have been in contact since the early Middle Ages, loanwords in both belong to different chronological strata and reveal different periods of acquisition.\nThe earliest phase of contacts is dated to the 6th–8th century CE, reflecting some of the more archaic phonetic features of Slavic as well as early Albanian phonology.\nThe early Slavic loanwords into Albanian developed Slavic *s as /ʃ/ and *y as /u/ within Albanian phonology of that era.\nSuch toponyms include [Bushtricë](https://bliptext.com/articles/bushtric) ([Kukës](https://bliptext.com/articles/kuk-s)), [Dishnica](https://bliptext.com/articles/dishnica) ([Përmet](https://bliptext.com/articles/p-rmet-district)), Dragoshtunjë ([Elbasan](https://bliptext.com/articles/elbasan)), [Leshnjë](https://bliptext.com/articles/leshnj) ([Leshnjë](https://bliptext.com/articles/leshnj), [Berat](https://bliptext.com/articles/berat) and other areas), [Shelcan](https://bliptext.com/articles/shushic-elbasan) ([Elbasan](https://bliptext.com/articles/elbasan)), [Shishtavec](https://bliptext.com/articles/shishtavec) ([Kukës](https://bliptext.com/articles/kuk-s)/Gora), [Shuec](https://bliptext.com/articles/prog-r) ([Devoll](https://bliptext.com/articles/devoll-municipality)) and [Shtëpëz](https://bliptext.com/articles/picar) ([Gjirokastër](https://bliptext.com/articles/gjirokast-r-county)), Shopël ([Iballë](https://bliptext.com/articles/iball)), [Veleshnjë](https://bliptext.com/articles/veleshnj) ([Skrapar](https://bliptext.com/articles/skrapar)) and others.\nPart of the toponyms of early Slavic origin were acquired in Albanian before undergoing the changes of the [Slavic liquid metathesis](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-liquid-metathesis) (before c. end of the 8th century CE).\nThey include [Ardenicë](https://bliptext.com/articles/ardenica-monastery) (Lushnjë), Berzanë (Lezhë), Gërdec and Berzi (Tiranë) and a cluster of toponyms along the route Berat-Tepelenë-Përmet.\nThe evolution of the ancient toponym Lychnidus into Oh(ë)r(id) ([city](https://bliptext.com/articles/ohrid) and [lake](https://bliptext.com/articles/lake-ohrid)), which is attested in this form from 879 CE, required an early long-standing period of Tosk Albanian–East South Slavic bilingualism, or at least contact, resulting from the Tosk Albanian [rhotacism](https://bliptext.com/articles/rhotacism) -n- into -r- and Eastern South Slavic [l-vocalization](https://bliptext.com/articles/l-vocalization) ly- into o-.\nThe name of the region [Labëri](https://bliptext.com/articles/lab-ria) resulted through the Slavic liquid metathesis: South Slavic *Labanьja < Late Common Slavic *Olbanьja 'Albania', and was reborrowed in that form into Albanian, in the period when [rhotacism](https://bliptext.com/articles/rhotacism) was still active in Tosk Albanian.\n\n# History of study\n[Vladimir Orel](https://bliptext.com/articles/vladimir-orel) is one of the main modern international linguists to have dealt with the passage from [Proto-Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european) to Proto-Albanian to Modern Albanian.\nAccording to Orel, the study of Proto-Albanian [syntax](https://bliptext.com/articles/syntax) remains in its infancy so there are some limitations to the work.\nHowever, there have been developments in the understanding of the historical development of [phonetics](https://bliptext.com/articles/phonetics) and [vocabulary](https://bliptext.com/articles/vocabulary).\nOther major work has been done by [Eqrem Çabej](https://bliptext.com/articles/eqrem-abej) and [Shaban Demiraj](https://bliptext.com/articles/shaban-demiraj) as well as by major scholars in the field of Romanian historical linguistics as it relates to Albanian (see [Albanian–Romanian linguistic relationship](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-romanian-linguistic-relationship)) as well as other Balkan linguists.\nA large amount of work done on Proto-Albanian is published in German, rather than English.\n\n## Nomenclature of periodization of Proto-Albanian\n[Vladimir Orel](https://bliptext.com/articles/vladimir-orel) distinguishes the following periods of Proto-Albanian: 1) \"Early Proto-Albanian\" (EPA): spoken before the 1st century CE, when Albanian had not yet acquired extensive influence via [language contact](https://bliptext.com/articles/language-contact) from [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin)/[Proto-Romance](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-romance). 2) \"Late Proto-Albanian\" (LPA): after extensive [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin) contact, with the end of the period seeing contacts between ancient Slavic idioms still close to the [Proto-Slavic language](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-slavic-language), in the 6th and 7th centuries CE.\nDuring this period the structure of Proto-Albanian was \"shattered\" by major changes.\nRanko Matasović distinguishes the following periods of Proto-Albanian: 1) \"Pre-Proto-Albanian\": essentially equivalent to Vladimir Orel's \"Early Proto-Albanian\", except that the newer paradigm of Matasović dates Latin/Albanian contact a century earlier, and thus it ends for Matasović in the 1st century BCE rather than the 1st century CE. After this period ends, Latin contact begins to transform the language. 2) \"Early Proto-Albanian\": corresponds to the earlier phases of what is for Orel \"Late Proto-Albanian\".\nFor Matasović, the period spans the 1st century BCE to the 6th century CE, halting before contact with Slavic idioms begins.\n3) \"Late Proto-Albanian\": includes the last two centuries of LPA for Orel, plus most of the unattested period of \"Old Albanian\", halting before Turkish influence begins. In this paradigm, Gheg and Tosk split from Early Proto-Albanian, not Late Proto-Albanian, consistent with our knowledge that the split preceded Slavic contact. 4) \"Early Albanian\": corresponds to the late, Ottoman, phase of Old Albanian in the traditional paradigm, ending in 1800, at which point it transitions to Modern Albanian.\nDemiraj, like Matasović and unlike Orel, observes the 5th/6th centuries as a boundary between stages, but instead places the \"emergence of Albanian\" from its parent after this point, rather than the 14th.\nIn an Albanian chapter penned by [Michiel de Vaan](https://bliptext.com/articles/michiel-de-vaan) within Klein, Joseph and Fritz' 2018 Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics, Demiraj's periods are adhered to.\nOrel's \"Later Proto-Albanian\", which is for them also definitively placed before Slavic contact, is referred to as simply \"Proto-Albanian\" (PAlb) or, in German, \"Uralbanisch\", reflecting the terminology of earlier writing in German.\nWhat is for Orel \"Early Proto-Albanian\" (EPA), dated definitively before the onset of Latin contact, is for De Vaan, \"Pre-Proto-Albanian\" (PPAlb); in German, this stage is called \"Voruralbanisch\" or \"Frühuralbanisch\".\nDe Vaan also discusses the possibility of breaking \"Pre-Proto-Albanian\" into two stages: one before the first Greek loanwords, and one that is after the first Greek loanwords, but before contact with Latin.\nThis page at present is using the paradigm of Orel.\n\n# Phonology\nExtensive recent studies on Proto-Albanian phonology have been published by Huld (1984), Beekes (1995), Shaban Demiraj (1996), Bardhyl Demiraj (1997), Orel (2000), Hock (2005), Matzinger (2006), Vermeer (2008), Schumacher (2013), and De Vaan (2018).\nAt present, this page follows Orel's paradigm for periods of Proto-Albanian, and presents the relationship between the synchronic phonologies of both \"EPA\" and \"LPA\" with diachronic relationships to each other and to ancestral [Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-european-languages) forms as well as descendant Albanian forms.\n\n## Stress\nIn Early Proto-Albanian, stress was paradigmatic, and behaved according to morphological class, with a base on the first syllable.\nIn different paradigms, the stress pattern was varyingly barytonic, oxytonic, and mobile.\nUnstressed vowels lost one mora—long vowels were shortened, already short vowels were often deleted.\nIn Later Proto-Albanian, however, a new system of unstressed vowel reduction emerged where *a reduced to *ë while all others were simply deleted (except for post-tonic inlaut vowels, which became *ë).\nOrel gives the following examples:\n\n## Vowels\n**Early Proto-Albanian** possessed four distinctive short vowels: *a, *e, *i and *u.\nProto-Indo-European *o had merged into *a by the Early Proto-Albanian stage.\nA five-way distinction was maintained for long vowels: *ā, *ē, *ī, *ō, and *ū.\nEarly Proto-Albanian also had four diphthongs: *ei, *ai, *eu and *au.\nEarly Proto-Albanian's vowel inventory began to change as a result of Latin contact.\nInitially Albanian was resistant to the restoration of short *o as a separate phoneme, with Latin unstressed *o being replaced by *a, and stressed Latin *o being replaced by *u.\nHowever, in later loans, Latin *o is maintained in Albanian as *o.\nAdditionally, some Latin loans with short *u saw Latin *u replaced by *o, as well as *ə specifically in unstressed positions before sonorants.\nIn two cases, Orel argues that Latin short /u/ was lengthened in Albanian to /u:/, ultimately to render /y/.\nOn the other hand, whatever effect Ancient Greek loanwords had at their time of absorption is unclear, but diachronically the vowels always agree with regular internal Albanian developments.\n**Late Proto-Albanian**\nLate Proto-Albanian exhibited *a, *i and *u throughout its development as distinctive short vowels.\n*o was restored to the phonemic inventory as a result of loanwords where it was increasingly maintained instead of replaced.\nAlthough *e was eliminated by breaking to *ie (which would render je and ja), it was restored by the leveling of /ai/ to /e/ and other phenomena that replaced /a/, /ie/, and /ue/ with /e/.\nThe only long vowel preserved in its original form was *ī.\n*ō was replaced by *ue, *ē was merged into *ā and both were rounded and eventually raised to *o, while *ū merged with the diphthong *ui, ultimately rendering *y.\nBy Late Proto-Albanian, all the original Indo-European diphthongs had now leveled, but new diphthongs were absorbed in loans, and were also innovated by breaking phenomena: *ie, *ue and *ui.\n*ai in Latin words with AE shared the fate of inherited Early Proto-Albanian *ai, becoming *e, while Latin AU similarly shared the fate of inherited *au and became *a.\nPhonemically nasal vowels emerged in Late Proto-Albanian.\nFirst, all vowels standing before nasal consonants were nasalized.\nThe following nasal consonant was then lost in certain morphological contexts, while the vowel remained nasalized, resulting in the emergence of LPA phonemes denoted *â, *ê, *î, and *û.\nExcept in certain Gheg varieties, *ê merged into *â.\nThe traditional view presented by Orel and Desnickaja is that distinctive nasalization was lost by Tosk but retained by Gheg and that this is a taxonomical difference between the two.\nHowever this has now been challenged, after Sheper and Gjinari discovered Lab dialects (Lab is a subdialect of Tosk) in the Kurvelesh region that still had distinctive nasal vowels, and Totoni likewise found that the Lab speech of [Borsh](https://bliptext.com/articles/borsh) also still has nasal vowel phonemes.\nThis means that, instead of the traditional view, it is possible that denasalization happened in most Tosk dialects only after the split from Gheg.\nSlavic *ū appears to still have been back and round when it was loaned into Albanian, but it is after the diphthongization and resulting fronting of the original Early Proto-Albanian *ū to *y was no longer absorbing new *ū segments, as they are, with only three exceptions, reflected as *u.\nSlavic *o had already become *a in the Slavic languages that contacted Albanian by the time of contact, and was loaned as *a for the most part; as is reflected also in other non-Slavic languages absorbing these words.\nAfter /v/, this *a became *o again in two attested cases: kos (\"yogurt\", from Proto-Slavic *kvasъ) and vorbë (\"clay pot\").\nIt was at the end of the LPA period that length became no longer distinctive in Albanian, although many Gheg and some Lab dialects preserved it and/or re-innovated it.\nFurthermore, by Old Albanian, all diphthongs had been lost: those ending in -i were all leveled, the -u was lost in those ending in -u, and those ending in -e were converted to glide + vowel sequences; further changes including the frequent effacement of the former first element or otherwise its hardening into an occlusive (typically /v/ for former u-, and gj /ɟ/ for former i-) rendering the former presence of a diphthong rather opaque in many reflexes.\n\n### Diachronic development\nThis table differentiates short vowels form long vowels with the IPA symbol <ː> being applied to the long vowels.\nSpecifically contextualized reflex results are placed in parentheses.\n\n## Development of Indo-European sonorants\nThe nasal sonorants *n̥ and *m̥ both rendered Early Proto-Albanian *a, which remains *a in modern Albanian (PIE *ǵʰh₂éns \"goose\" > EPA *gatā > Alb gatë \"heron\").\nLike EPA *a elsewhere, in some cases it was raised to *e, as seen in PIE *h₁ln̥gʷʰtós > EPA *lekta > Albanian lehtë (suffixed with -të).\n\n## Consonants\n\n## The development of IE dorsal consonants in Albanian\nIndo-European languages are traditionally divided into [two groups](https://bliptext.com/articles/centum-and-satem-languages) based on the development of the three series of [dorsal](https://bliptext.com/articles/dorsal-consonant) (often called \"[guttural](https://bliptext.com/articles/guttural)\") stops, viz.\nthe palatal (*ḱ *ǵ *ǵʰ), velar (*k *g *gʰ) and labiovelar (*kʷ *gʷ *gʷʰ) series.\nIn the \"centum\" languages (e.g. [Italic languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages), [Germanic languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/germanic-languages), [Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/greek-language)) the palatal series has merged with velar series, while the labiovelar series remained distinct; whereas in the \"satem\" languages ([Indo-Iranian languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-iranian-languages), [Balto-Slavic languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/balto-slavic-languages)), the labiovelars merged with the plain velars, while the palatals shifted to [sibilant](https://bliptext.com/articles/sibilant) consonants.\nMany Indo-Europeanists have classified Albanian as a satem language since it has dental fricatives /θ/ and /ð/ as the common reflex of the palatal series, while velar and labiovelar stops in most cases have merged.\nHowever, there is clear evidence that all three IE dorsal series remained distinct (at least before front vowels) in Proto-Albanian:\nIn the later phonological history of Albanian, the velars /k/ and /g/ were subject to further palatalizations.\nThe (partial) retention of the Proto-IE three-way contrast for dorsal stops is an archaic feature that links Albanian with the wider [Paleo-Balkanic group](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) and is shared with Messapic and Armenian.\n\n# Basic traits of Proto-Albanian grammar\n\n## Verb conjugation in Proto-Albanian and Old Gheg (Old Albanian)\n\n### Introduction; the present tense (thematic verbs), adaptation of borrowings and examples\nVerbs in Early Proto-Albanian (Early PA) and contemporary Albanian are divided into thematic verbs and athematic verbs, thus following this division from Proto-Indo-European (PIE).\nPA *-a in the first person singular of the present cannot come from PIE *-oh₂, since its reflex in Proto-Albanian would be *-e (if stressed) or *-ë (if unstressed).\nTherefore, *-a comes from dialectal PIE *-om.\nThe second and third person singular come from PIE *-esi, *-eti with the loss of PIE final *-i already occurred in pre-Albanian.\nThe second person plural has no reflex from PA but it was shaped later, between the passage from PA to Old Albanian; the modern ending -ni could come from *nū, a PA adverb meaning \"now\", identical to PIE *nū and Sanskrit nū; otherwise, it derives from the nasal verbal stem -nj- with a final *-i coming from the PA personal pronoun *jus, \"you (all)\".\nMost verb stems ending in a closed diphtong (-aj, -ej, -ij, -oj, -uj, -yj) in the singular come from a nasal stem in PA, ending in *-Cnj- or *-Vnj- (e.g., first person singular *-nja)-\nAs for the third person plural, the PIE thematic vowel *-o- mutates into PA *-i- perhaps due to the influence of the /i̯/ from the verbs in -oj- in the plural.\nMost [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin) (C**l**assica**l** [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin), Late [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin), Vu**l**ga**r** [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin)) ve**r**bs be**l**onging to the fi**r**st dec**l**ension (infinite -ā**r**e) we**r**e adapted into stems ending with PA *-ānj- (fi**r**st pe**r**son singu**l**a**r** *-ānja > O**l**d Gheg -onj > mode**r**n A**l**banian -oj) and, in **r**a**r**e**r** cases (usua**l****l**y ve**r**ba**l** **r**oots ending in **l**iquids, hence -**l**ā**r**e and -**r**ā**r**e), with PA *-enj- (> mode**r**n -ej-).\nAn example is modern këndoj < Latin cant**āre**, which points to a hypothetical PA ~*kand**ānj**- (first person singular ~*kand**ānj**a). Another example is shëmbëll**ej** < Late Latin simil**āre**.\nMost Latin verbs belonging to the second declension (infinite -ēre) were adapted into stems ending with -oj- and PA *-enj-.\nMost Latin verbs belonging to the third declension(unstressed and short infinite -ere) were adapted into stems ending with PA *-ānj- > modern -**oj**- and, in rarer cases, with -ej-. An example is modern fërg**oj** < Vulgar Latin frīg**ĕre**.\nMost Latin verbs belonging to the fourth declension (infinite -īre) were adapted into stems ending with PA *-inj- (> modern -ij-) and, in rarer cases, with -ej-.\nAn example is modern vij < Old Gheg vijn < Latin ven**īre**.\nMost [Proto-Slavic](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-slavic-language) verbs ending in *-iti /i:ti:/ in the infinite were adapted into stems ending with PA *-itj- (first person singular *-itja > modern -is; the consonant /t/ was probably weakened to /s/ and the final /a/ was unstressed and thus lost).\nAn example is molis < PA *melitja < PSL *mъdьliti /mudi'li:ti:/, \"to debilitate/weaken\".\nMost Proto-Slavic verbs ending in *-ati /a:ti:/ in the infinitive were adapted into stems ending with PA *-atj- (first person singular *-atja > modern -as).\nThe remaining Proto-Slavic verbs were adapted into stems ending with *-itj- (> modern -is, -it).\nThe following examples, except for kap and jap, are all in Old Gheg, a dialect of Old Albanian, and show the verb declension in Old Albanian to trace an idea of the passage between PIE morphology and Proto-Albanian, which then evolved into Old Albanian:\n\n### The present tense (athematic verbs) and examples\nThe verb \"to be\" (jam < PA *esmi < PIE*h₁ésmi ), as in PIE, is athematic and has a nasal infix *-n- in the third person singular and plural; perhaps, this infix is taken from the original third person plural in PIE, *-enti.\nPA had two more athematic verbs, kam (\"to have\" < PA *kapmi < Latin capiō) which is cognate with thematic kap < PA *kapa < PIE *kh₂pyóh₂, and thom (\"to say\" < PA *tsānsmi < Latin cēnseō).\nProbably, PA had a fourth athematic verb, ik (\"to go\") < PA *eika < earlier *eimi (identical to Ancient Greek), but then it was transformed into a thematic verb through the stem of the imperative.\nThe last verb, vete(m) in Standard Albanian, has two historical versions: an original version from PIE and a later version which culminates into the contemporary version.\nThe original versions in Early PA and PA are the direct reflex of athematic PIE *weh₂dʰ-, perhaps *weh₂dʰmi; then, the pre-modern version in Late PA is a reworked version that fuses the original version in PA and the suffix *-te, originally the preposition \"to\", *tek(u) (< PIE neuter demonstrative *to-, \"this/that\" < PIE *só).\n\n### The aorist tense and imperfect tense in Proto-Albanian; examples\nThe asigmatic aorist conjugation is based on the athematic paradygm and has a mobile accent perhaps due to the augmentation, which consists in the prefix *e-.\nThe same structure can be found in Greek.\nIn contemporary Albanian, the augmentation prefix is lost.\nIn the third person singular, the ending *-i should come from PA and PIE personal/demonstrative pronoun *is.\nThe sigmatic aorist conjugation is based on the athematic paradygm as well and zero-grade in morphology is explained by the influence of the participles in PA.\nThe endings of the imperfect originally come from the endings of the asigmatic aorist; at a later stage, the original vowel *-e- changed into *-i-.\n\n## Personal pronouns in Proto-Albanian\n\n## Noun declensions in Proto-Albanian\nNouns in Proto-Albanian are divided in to *a-stem nouns (< PIE *-os, whence they are also called *o-stem nouns) and *ā-stem nouns (< PIE *-éh₂).\nThere was a third group of nouns in Early PA, the *i-stem nouns (e.g., natë \"night\" < PA *naktā < PIE *nókʷts), which then merged into *o-stem nouns.\nThere are 5 cases (2 strong cases and 2 weak cases): nominative, genitive, dative, accusative and ablative, with a strong degree of syncretism among cases.\nPIE locative, vocative and instrumental were lost.\nContemporary Albanian has a vocative case -o for both masculine and feminine names: this vocative was borrowed from [South Slavic languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/south-slavic-languages) ([Serbo-Croatian](https://bliptext.com/articles/serbo-croatian), [Macedonian](https://bliptext.com/articles/macedonian-language), [Bulgarian](https://bliptext.com/articles/bulgarian-language)) since, in [Proto-Slavic](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-slavic-language), the feminine vocative became *-o, which is an innovation from PIE *-éh₂.\n\n### Noun declension in the masculine indefinite\n* a-stem nouns had a final *-a in the strong cases (nominative and accusative), reflecting PIE *-o-; since this final *-a was unstressed in most cases, it was lost in contemporary Albanian.\nHence, today most of masculine words in the strong cases end in consonants except for some false feminine words ending in -ë. The two strong cases already merged into a single ending in the singular in Early PA, while the three weak cases already converged into a single ending in the singular as well.\nThe ending was either *-i or *-u; the second one was used after preceding vowels, semi-vowels and velar consonants *k- and *g-.\nThese two endings reflect PIE locative *-éy, but it is unknown if the weak cases already merged in Pre-Albanian.\nToday, weak cases are distinguished each other by the use of clitics.\nIn the plural, *a-stem nouns, strong cases ended in *-ō/*-ai.\n*-ō is the reflex of PIE *-ōs, while *-ai is the reflex of PIE *-oy.\nThen, in some words, one of the two ending became either fixed or preferred.\nIn the words without preferred ending, stressed *-ō/*-ai developed into contemporary -e and -a (this last ending is the result of an overlap from the feminine declension already in PA in which the expected *-ō/*-ai was substituted by *-ā); in words with preferred ending *-ō (unstressed), it developed into contemporary -ë; in words with preferred ending *-ai (unstressed), it developed into contemporary zero-ending, which means that most of the plural end in consonant.\nIn the genitive and dative plural, *-ō comes from PIE genitive plural *-ōm (stressed) and culminates into contemporary -e.\nThe other modern ending -eve comes from a modification of PIE genitive plural, *-wōm > PA *-wō; the alternative modern ending -ave comes from a modification of PIE genitive plural *-éh₂wōm through the feminine thematic vowel of the feminine *-éh₂-, thus reflecting the overlap with the feminine in the strong cases.\nThe ablative plural -esh comes from PA *-aisu, from PIE *-oysu.\nAblative in -t is common in North Gheg and it was transferred from the definite declension.\n\n### Examples of indefinite noun declension in PA (*a-stem)\n\n### Noun declension in the feminine indefinite\n* ā-stem nouns had a final *-ā in the nominative; this vowel was hit by vowel reduction and became -ë, which is the mark of the indefinite feminine words.\nThe two strong cases (nominative and accusative) already merged in Early PA. The plural of all weak cases comes from PA *-āi, which comes from PIE dative-locative *-éh₂i.\nThe nominative plural *-ā is identical to the nominative singular and comes from PIE *-éh₂s.\nIf the long vowel was stressed, it becomes contemporary Albanian -a, otherwise it becomes contemporary -ë.\nThe weak cases in PA were copied by analogy from the *a-stem nouns and show the thematic vowel of the feminine, *-éh₂-.\n\n### Examples of indefinite noun declension in Early PA (*ā-stem)\n\n## Some examples of adjectives in PA\nIn PA adjectival declension, all cases other than the nominative singular and plural were lost.\nAdjectives in PA had either masculine or feminine gender depending on the gender of the word they refer to.\nThe derivation of adjectives from PIE to Proto-Albanian follows all the rules for indefinite nouns.\nMasculine adjectives in PA usually ended in *-a in the singular (< PIE *-os), while their feminine counterparts usually ended in *-ā (< PIE *-éh₂); rarely, masculine adjectives ended in *-i.\nIn contemporary Albanian, masculine adjectives can either end in consonant or in -ë (< stressed PA *-a).\nAdjectives in contemporary Albanian always go in couple with the \"adjectival article\", a particle always found before the adjective.\nIt's declination in the masculine singular, feminine singular and plural is \"i, e, të\".\nThe adjectival article in the feminine comes from PA *ō(d) < PIE *ēd ~ *ōd (ablative sg. stem of PIE *ē- ~ *ō-); this particle was most likely a demonstrative.\n\n# Numerals in Proto-Albanian\n\n# Classification & isoglosses with other Indo-European branches\nThe closest language to Albanian is [Messapic](https://bliptext.com/articles/messapic-language), with which it forms a common branch titled Illyric in Hyllested & Joseph (2022).\nHyllested & Joseph (2022) in agreement with recent bibliography identify Greco-Phrygian as the IE branch closest to the Albanian-Messapic one.\nThese two branches form an areal grouping – which is often called \"Balkan IE\" – with Armenian.\nHyllested & Joseph (2022) identify the highest shared number of innovations between (Proto-)Albanian and (Proto-)Greek.\nInnovative creations of agricultural terms shared only between Albanian and Greek, such as *h2(e)lbh-it- 'barley' and *spor-eh2- 'seed', were formed from non-agricultural Proto-Indo-European roots through semantic changes to adapt them for agriculture.\nSince they are limited only to Albanian and Greek, they can be traced back with certainty only to their last common Indo-European ancestor, and not projected back into [Proto-Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european).\nA remarkable Greek/Albanian isogloss is a very ancient form for \"hand\": *mər-, cf.\nthe Albanian verb marr (\"hold\") and the Greek márē (\"hand\"), and also Greek márptō (\"grab\").\nA common [Balkan Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) root *aiğ(i)- (\"goat\") can be reflected in Albanian edh (\"goat, kid\") < PAlb *aidza and dhi (\"nanny goat) < PAlb *aidzijɑ̄ with Greek αἴξ (\"goat\", gen. αἰγός) and Armenian ayc (\"(nanny) goat\"). It has been noted that the Balkan IE root and all the alleged Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian roots with a meaning \"goat\" are likely to be not Proto-Indo-European, as they may all originate as independent and relatively early, post-PIE borrowings, from the substrate languages spoken by the [sedentary farmers](https://bliptext.com/articles/agrarian-society) who were encountered by immigrating Indo-European [pastoralists](https://bliptext.com/articles/pastoralism). The view of a substrate borrowing can be corroborated by areal words for \"goat\" in other IE languages, such as [Gothic](https://bliptext.com/articles/gothic-language) gaits (\"goat\") and [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin) haedus (\"kid\"), reflecting *gʰaid̯(-o)-, considered as a substrate word usually linked with [Semitic languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/semitic-languages) (cf.\n[Akkadian](https://bliptext.com/articles/akkadian-language) gadû, [Aramaic](https://bliptext.com/articles/aramaic-language) gaδiā ̄\"kid\"). However it was most likely not directly borrowed from Semitic, but from a European substrate language that in turn had loaned the word from a common third source. Hence it can be viewed as an old cultural word, which was slowly transmitted to different European languages, and then adopted by the newcoming Indo-European speakers. Within this scenario it should be remarked the exclusive sharing of a common proto-form between Albanian, Greek, and Armenian, which could have been borrowed at a pre-stage that was common to these languages.\nShortly after they had diverged from one another, Albanian, Greek, and Armenian, undoubtedly also underwent a longer period of contact (as can be seen, for example, in the irregular correspondence: Greek σκόρ(ο)δον, Armenian sxtor, xstor, and Albanian hudhër, hurdhë \"garlic\").\nFurthermore, intense Greek–Albanian contacts certainly have occurred thereafter.\nAn example of secondary derivations from Palaeo-Balkan linguistic contacts is the [Thracian](https://bliptext.com/articles/thracian-language) word σπίνος spínos 'a kind of stone, which blazes when water touches it' (i.e. 'lime'), attested in [Aristotle](https://bliptext.com/articles/aristotle) and [Theophrastus](https://bliptext.com/articles/theophrastus), with cognate Greek τίτανος ([Attic](https://bliptext.com/articles/attic-greek)) and κίττανος ([Doric](https://bliptext.com/articles/doric-greek)) 'gypsum, chalk, lime', stemming [PIE](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european-language) *k̑witn̥Hos 'white, whitish': although from the same [PIE](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european-language) root, Albanian shpâ(ni) 'lime, tartar' and Greek σπίνος 'lime' derive from a secondary origin as they were probably borrowed from [Thracian](https://bliptext.com/articles/thracian-language) due to phonetic reasons.\nIndeed, the original IE cluster *k̑w- yields Albanian s- before any vowel, while in Thracian it could yield sp-.\nSpecifically Indo-Iranian/Greek/Albanian and Greek/Armenian/Albanian isoglosses are both relatively rare, examples including ndaj (to divide; Indo-Greek-Albanian) and ëndërr (\"dream\"; Greek/Armenian/Albanian).\nArmenian/Albanian isoglosses are considered \"insignificant\" by Orel.\nThere are a considerable number of Indo-Iranian/Albanian isoglosses, which are notably often connected with horses, horse tending, and milk products.\nIn older literature, Orel (2000) argues that Albanian has a large number of [isoglosses](https://bliptext.com/articles/isoglosses) that are common to Albanian, [Germanic](https://bliptext.com/articles/germanic-languages), [Baltic](https://bliptext.com/articles/baltic-languages) and [Slavic](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-languages), as part of a \"North Eastern\" lexical grouping, with a large number of these referring to [wood](https://bliptext.com/articles/wood) or objects made out of [wood](https://bliptext.com/articles/wood).\nOrel (1998) noted 24 isoglosses between Balto-Slavic and Albanian, 48 common words between Baltic and Albanian and 24 between Albanian and Slavic.\nHyllested & Joseph (2022) review Orel's common items and argue that a substantial number don't have convincing etymologies or do not constitute isoglosses between Balto-Slavic and Albanian.\nAn example is Albanian murg (dark) and Lithuanian margas (colourful) which Orel considers to be isoglosses but both are equally related to Proto-Germanic *murkaz, ancient Greek ἀμορβός amorbos and Proto-Slavic *mergъ.\nOrel identifies only one Albanian/[Italic](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages)/[Celtic](https://bliptext.com/articles/celtic-languages) isogloss, blertë (\"green\"), cognate to [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin) flōrus (\"bright\") and [Irish](https://bliptext.com/articles/irish-language) blár (\"gray\").\nSpecifically Celtic/Albanian vocabulary was previously thought to be limited although including at least one core vocabulary item (hënë \"moon\", cognate to Welsh cann \"white\" and Breton cann \"full moon\"), but recent work by Trumper in 2018 has proposed a larger though still not overwhelming set, with the notable addition of dritë (\"light\").\nAlthough knowledge of [Tocharian](https://bliptext.com/articles/tocharian-languages) is fragmentary, the one known Albanian/[Tocharian](https://bliptext.com/articles/tocharian-languages) isogloss is \"very important\" as noted by Orel: kush (\"who\", cognate to [Tocharian](https://bliptext.com/articles/tocharian-languages) A kus, with the same meaning).\n\n## Citations","current_revision":null,"created_by":"kACnuQmH5k9Nr5VNVEpVeg7XpvUmMctD","created_at":"2025-01-26T07:23:10.396Z","updated_at":"2025-01-26T07:23:10.396Z","search_vector":"'albanian':3 'languag':4 'proto':2 'proto-albanian':1","search_content":" \n**Name:** Proto-Albanian \n**Region:** Western Balkans \n**Era:** c. 1000 BCE – 600 CE \n**Familycolor:** Indo-European \n**Notes:** The only survivor of the [Albanoid](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanoid) languages of the [Paleo-Balkan group](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) \n**Ancestor:** [Proto-Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european-language) \n**Ancestor 2:** Proto-Albanoid \n**Target:** [Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language) ([dialects](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-dialects)) \n**Child 1:** Proto-[Gheg](https://bliptext.com/articles/gheg-albanian) \n**Child 2:** Proto-[Tosk](https://bliptext.com/articles/tosk-albanian) \n \n\n# \n**Proto-[Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language)** is the ancestral [reconstructed](https://bliptext.com/articles/linguistic-reconstruction) language of [Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language), before the [Gheg](https://bliptext.com/articles/gheg-albanian)–[Tosk](https://bliptext.com/articles/tosk-albanian) dialectal diversification (before c. 600 CE).\n[Albanoid](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanoid) and other [Paleo-Balkan languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) had their formative core in the [Balkans](https://bliptext.com/articles/balkans) after the [Indo-European migrations](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-european-migrations) in the region.\nWhether descendants or sister languages of what was called [Illyrian](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrian-language) by classical sources, Albanian and [Messapic](https://bliptext.com/articles/messapic-language), on the basis of shared features and innovations, are grouped together in a [common branch](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanoid) in the current phylogenetic classification of the [Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-european-languages) language family.\nThe precursor of Albanian can be considered a completely formed independent IE language since at least the first millennium BCE, with the beginning of the early Proto-Albanian phase.\nProto-Albanian is reconstructed by way of the [comparative method](https://bliptext.com/articles/comparative-method) between the [Tosk](https://bliptext.com/articles/tosk-albanian) and [Gheg](https://bliptext.com/articles/gheg-albanian) dialects and between Albanian and other Indo-European languages, as well as through [contact linguistics](https://bliptext.com/articles/contact-linguistics) studying early [loanwords](https://bliptext.com/articles/loanword) from and into Albanian and [structural](https://bliptext.com/articles/language-structure) and [phonological](https://bliptext.com/articles/phonology) convergences with other languages.\nLoanwords into Albanian treated through its phonetic evolution can be traced back as early as the first contacts with [Doric Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/doric-greek) (West Greek) since the 7th century BCE, but the most important of which are those from Latin (dated by De Vaan to the period 167 BCE to 400 CE) and from [Slavic](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-languages) (dated from 600 CE onward).\nThe evidence from loanwords allows linguists to construct in great detail the shape of native words at the points of major influxes of loans from well-attested languages.\nIn historical linguistics Proto-Albanian is broken up into different stages which are usually delimited by the onset of contact with different well-attested languages.\nPre-Proto-Albanian is the early stage of the precursor of Albanian during the first millennium BCE, marked by contacts with Ancient Greek, but not yet by contacts with Latin.\nProto-Albanian proper is dated to the period of contacts with Latin, starting from the 2nd century BCE after the [Roman](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-republic) conquest of the Western Balkans, but the major Latin influence occurred since the first years of the common era when the Western Balkans were eventually incorporated into the [Roman](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-republic) Empire.\nCommon Albanian or its two dialects, Proto-Gheg and Proto-Tosk, experienced the earliest contacts with South Slavic languages since the [Slavic migrations to the Balkans](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-migrations-to-the-balkans) in the 6th–7th centuries CE.\nThe rise of Tosk from Proto-Albanian was prompted before Slavic contacts circa 600 CE, as evidenced by the fact that Latin and [ancient Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-greek) loanwords are treated like native words with regard to taxonomical differences between Gheg and Tosk, but the same is not true of Slavic loans.\n\n# History\n[Albanoid](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanoid) and other [Paleo-Balkan languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) had their formative core in the [Balkans](https://bliptext.com/articles/balkans) after the [Indo-European migrations](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-european-migrations) in the region about 3000 to 2500 BCE.\nThey replaced the [pre-Indo-European languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/pre-indo-european-languages), which left traces of the Mediterranean-Balkan substratum.\nShortly after they had diverged from one another, Pre-Albanian, Pre-Greek, and Pre-Armenian underwent a longer period of contact, as shown by common correspondences that are irregular for other IE languages.\nFurthermore, intense Greek–Albanian contacts have continued thereafter.\nThe precursor of Albanian can be considered a completely formed independent IE language since at least the first millennium BCE, with the beginning of the early Proto-Albanian phase.\nThe precursor of Albanian is often thought to have been an [Illyrian language](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrian-languages) for obvious geographic and historical reasons as well as for some linguistic evidence,\nIn classical antiquity Proto-Albanian was spoken in the central-western part of the Balkan Peninsula, to the north and west of the [Ancient Greeks](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-greeks), as shown by early [Doric Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/doric-greek) (West Greek) and [Ancient Macedonian](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-macedonian-language) loanwords that were treated with characteristic Albanian features, by classical [place names](https://bliptext.com/articles/place-names) exclusively observing Albanian accent and phonetic rules, as well as by several Proto-Albanian items preserved in ancient glossaries.\n\n## Contacts with Ancient Greek\nProto-Albanian speech came into contact in its earlier stage with Ancient Greek since the 7th century BCE, when the [Greek colonies](https://bliptext.com/articles/greek-colonisation) were founded on the Adriatic coast of Albania.\nIn that period early loanwords were borrowed from [Doric Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/doric-greek) (West Greek), either directly from the colonists or indirectly through trade communication in the hinterland.\nDuring the 5th–4th centuries BCE Proto-Albanian directly loaned words from [Ancient Macedonian](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-macedonian-language), at a time when this language [gained prominence](https://bliptext.com/articles/rise-of-macedon) in the region and was not yet replaced by [Koine Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/koine-greek).\nSeveral Proto-Albanian terms have been preserved in the lexicon of [Hesychius of Alexandria](https://bliptext.com/articles/hesychius-of-alexandria) and other ancient glossaries.\nSome of the Proto-Albanian glosses in Hesychius are considered to have been loaned to the Dorik Greek as early as the 7th century BCE.\nEvidence of a significant level of early [linguistic contact](https://bliptext.com/articles/linguistic-contact) between Albanian and Greek is provided by ancient common [structural](https://bliptext.com/articles/language-structure) innovations and [phonologic](https://bliptext.com/articles/phonology) convergence such as:\nThose innovations are limited only to the Albanian and Greek languages and are not shared with other languages of the [Balkan sprachbund](https://bliptext.com/articles/balkan-sprachbund).\nSince they precede the Balkan sprachbund era, those innovations date to a prehistoric phase of the Albanian language, spoken at that time in the same area as Greek and within a social frame of bilingualism among early Albanians having to be able to speak some form of Greek.\n\n## Contacts with Latin, Romance, and Middle Greek\nProto-Albanian came into contact with [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin) since the [Illyro–Roman wars](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyro-roman-wars) in the late 3rd and early 2nd centuries BCE, when the [Roman Republic](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-republic) defeated the [Illyrians](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrians) and began to establish its rule in the Western Balkans, gradually consolidating its dominion during the last two centuries BCE.\nBut the major Latin influence in Proto-Albanian occurred since the first years of the common era, when the Western Balkans were eventually incorporated into the [Roman Empire](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-empire) after the Great Illyrian Revolt of 6–9 CE ([Bellum Batonianum](https://bliptext.com/articles/bellum-batonianum)).\nThe Latin loanwords in Proto-Albanian were borrowed through the entire period of spoken Latin in the Western Balkans (c. 167 BCE–400 CE), reflecting different chronological layers and penetrating, without any restrictions, into virtually all semantic fields.\nEven the basic [Christian](https://bliptext.com/articles/christianity) terms are of Latin origin, and since they entered Proto-Albanian before the Gheg–Tosk dialectal diversification, the Proto-Albanian speakers were [christianized](https://bliptext.com/articles/christianized) under the Latin sphere of influence, specifically in the 4th century CE.\n[Historical linguistic](https://bliptext.com/articles/historical-linguistic) considerations indicate that the Roman province of [Moesia Superior](https://bliptext.com/articles/moesia), and more specifically the ancient region of [Dardania](https://bliptext.com/articles/dardani) and adjacent zones, constitute the best candidate for the area where Proto-Albanian received its major Latin influence, and where intensive contacts between Proto-Albanian and [Proto-Romance](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-romance) occurred, eventually producing the shared innovations between Tosk Albanian and [(Proto-)Romanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-romanian-language).\nThose innovations ultimately prompted the rise of Tosk from Proto-Albanian, a diversification that began not later than the 6th–7th centuries CE (i.e. before the period of contacts with Slavic).\nGheg Albanian was already separated from the Albanian–(Proto-)Romanian contact zone at an earlier period.\nToponymy provides evidence that Albanian was already spoken since late antiquity in northern and central Albania, but not yet in southern Albania (south of the [Shkumbin](https://bliptext.com/articles/shkumbin) river).\nThose considerations indicate that unlike Gheg, the Tosk dialect could not yet have already occupied its historical geographic distribution in late antiquity.\nOn the other hand, the multi-layered Albanian dialects in western North Macedonia provide evidence that the area was inhabited by Albanian-speakers since antiquity.\nThe historical geographic spread of the Albanian dialects as it appeared in medieval times is considered to have been shaped by the [settlement of Slavic farmers](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-migrations-to-the-balkans) from the 6th–7th centuries CE.\nDuring the centuries of the [Great Migration Period](https://bliptext.com/articles/migration-period) in the Roman Empire after the 3rd century CE, the Imperial structures progressively weakened and eventually collapsed.\nProto-Albanian and Proto-Romanian speakers remained in close contact for a substantial time frame as mountain [pastoralists](https://bliptext.com/articles/pastoralism).\nThe fact that the Albanian language reflects a clear pastoralist stage does not allow conclusions about the Proto-Albanian speakers' way of life during classical antiquity, as only the speech of the mountain pastoralists managed to survive the Great Migrations.\nIt has been suggested that the Latin influence on Albanian resulted from a urbanized way of life, which was followed by a flight from towns similar to what occurred to the Eastern-Romance speakers.\nNevertheless, the extensive influence of the Albanian language on the pastoral vocabulary and its influence, albeit lower, on the [crop cultivation](https://bliptext.com/articles/crop-cultivation) vocabulary, in Eastern Romance languages, indicate that Proto-Albanian speakers were already leading a pastoral lifestyle at the time when Latin speakers assumed the same way of life, borrowing from (Proto-)Albanian a number of technical terms.\nThe post-Roman contact zone between Albanian and Common Romanian is considered to have been located in [Dardania](https://bliptext.com/articles/dardania-roman-province) and adjacent areas.\nFrom this contact the Tosk Albanian dialect is considered to have received the first impetus of developments that were shared with Eastern Romance and that did not affect the Gheg Albanian dialect as it had already separated in earlier times.\nAfter a period of common innovations, but before the rise of the [rhotacism](https://bliptext.com/articles/rhotacism) n > r (which preceded contacts with Slavic from c. 600 CE), speakers of Eastern Romance varieties that were not yet affected by this fundamental sound change separated from the Tosk Albanian–Common Romanian contact zone.\nIn a period that followed the rise of those innovations, Tosk Albanian is considered to have moved – driven by the offensive of the Slavs – to Albania south of the [Shkumbin](https://bliptext.com/articles/shkumbin) river in its historically documented location.\nAt the time of the South Slavic incursion and the threat of ethnic turbulence in the Albanian-inhabited regions, the Christianization of the Albanians had already been completed and it had apparently developed for Albanians as a further identity-forming feature alongside the ethnic-linguistic unity.\nChurch administration, which was controlled by a thick network of Roman bishoprics, collapsed with the arrival of the Slavs.\nBetween the early 7th century and the late 9th century the interior areas of the Balkans were deprived of church administration, and Christianity might have survived only as a popular tradition on a reduced degree.\nThe reorganization of the Church as a cult institution in the region took a considerable amount of time, as the Balkans were brought back into the Christian orbit only after the recovery of the [Byzantine Empire](https://bliptext.com/articles/byzantine-empire) and through the activity of Byzantine missionaries.\nThe earliest ascertained church vocabulary of [Middle Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/middle-greek) origin in Albanian dates to the 8th–9th centuries, at the time of the [Byzantine Iconoclasm](https://bliptext.com/articles/byzantine-iconoclasm), which was started by the Byzantine Emperor [Leo III the Isaurian](https://bliptext.com/articles/leo-iii-the-isaurian).\nIn 726 Leo III established [de jure](https://bliptext.com/articles/de-jure) the jurisdiction of the [Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople](https://bliptext.com/articles/ecumenical-patriarchate-of-constantinople) over the Balkans, as the Church and the State established an institution.\nThe Eastern Church expanded its influence in the area along with the social and political developments.\nBetween the 7th and 12th centuries a powerful network of cult institutions were revived completely covering the ecclesiastical administration of the entire present-day Albanian-speaking compact area.\nIn particular an important role was played by the [Theme of Dyrrhachium](https://bliptext.com/articles/theme-of-dyrrhachium) and the [Archdiocese of Ohrid](https://bliptext.com/articles/archdiocese-of-ohrid).\nThe lack of [Old Church Slavonic](https://bliptext.com/articles/old-church-slavonic) terms in Albanian Christian terminology shows that the missionary activities during the [Christianization of the Slavs](https://bliptext.com/articles/christianization-of-the-slavs) did not involve Albanian-speakers, indeed, the Christian belief among Albanians had survived through the centuries and already become an important cultural element in their ethnic identity.\n# [The Roman province of Moesia Superior (in red), which included ancient Dardania, is considered as the best candidate for the area where Proto-Albanian received its major Latin influence, and where it experienced intensive contacts with Proto-Romance during the post-Latin period, which eventually produced the Tosk Albanian–(Proto)Romanian innovations that prompted the rise of Tosk from Proto-Albanian. | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/RomanEmpire///117///-///Moesia///Superior///and///Moesia///Inferior.svg]\n\n## Earliest contacts with South Slavic\nWhen the [Slavic-speaking farmers migrated](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-migrations-to-the-balkans) to the Balkans and settled the plains from the 6th–7th centruries CE, they encountered [Albania](https://bliptext.com/articles/albania)n-speaking Indo-Europeans and assimilated part of them, but the language of the [Albania](https://bliptext.com/articles/albania)ns who had taken refuge in the mountainous areas of present-day northern and central [Albania](https://bliptext.com/articles/albania), eastern [Montenegro](https://bliptext.com/articles/montenegro), western [North Macedonia](https://bliptext.com/articles/north-macedonia), and [Kosovo](https://bliptext.com/articles/kosovo), managed to survive the Great Migrations.\nLeading a [pastoral](https://bliptext.com/articles/pastoralism) lifestyle and although separated from Slavic-speakers, Albanian-speakers were not isolated, and contacts between Albanian and Slavic occurred thereafter.\nIn particular, Tosk Albanian came into contact with [Eastern South Slavic](https://bliptext.com/articles/eastern-south-slavic) dialects, and Gheg Albanian with [Western South Slavic](https://bliptext.com/articles/western-south-slavic) dialects.\nEarly long-standing contacts between Slavic-speakers and Albanian-speakers might have been common in mountain passages and agriculture or fishing areas, such as the valleys of the [White](https://bliptext.com/articles/white-drin) and [Black](https://bliptext.com/articles/black-drin) branches of the [Drin](https://bliptext.com/articles/drin-river) and around the [Shkodër](https://bliptext.com/articles/lake-shkod-r) and [Ohrid](https://bliptext.com/articles/ohrid) lakes.\nSuch contacts in these areas caused many changes in Slavic and Albanian local varieties.\nAs Albanian and South Slavic have been in contact since the early Middle Ages, loanwords in both belong to different chronological strata and reveal different periods of acquisition.\nThe earliest phase of contacts is dated to the 6th–8th century CE, reflecting some of the more archaic phonetic features of Slavic as well as early Albanian phonology.\nThe early Slavic loanwords into Albanian developed Slavic *s as /ʃ/ and *y as /u/ within Albanian phonology of that era.\nSuch toponyms include [Bushtricë](https://bliptext.com/articles/bushtric) ([Kukës](https://bliptext.com/articles/kuk-s)), [Dishnica](https://bliptext.com/articles/dishnica) ([Përmet](https://bliptext.com/articles/p-rmet-district)), Dragoshtunjë ([Elbasan](https://bliptext.com/articles/elbasan)), [Leshnjë](https://bliptext.com/articles/leshnj) ([Leshnjë](https://bliptext.com/articles/leshnj), [Berat](https://bliptext.com/articles/berat) and other areas), [Shelcan](https://bliptext.com/articles/shushic-elbasan) ([Elbasan](https://bliptext.com/articles/elbasan)), [Shishtavec](https://bliptext.com/articles/shishtavec) ([Kukës](https://bliptext.com/articles/kuk-s)/Gora), [Shuec](https://bliptext.com/articles/prog-r) ([Devoll](https://bliptext.com/articles/devoll-municipality)) and [Shtëpëz](https://bliptext.com/articles/picar) ([Gjirokastër](https://bliptext.com/articles/gjirokast-r-county)), Shopël ([Iballë](https://bliptext.com/articles/iball)), [Veleshnjë](https://bliptext.com/articles/veleshnj) ([Skrapar](https://bliptext.com/articles/skrapar)) and others.\nPart of the toponyms of early Slavic origin were acquired in Albanian before undergoing the changes of the [Slavic liquid metathesis](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-liquid-metathesis) (before c. end of the 8th century CE).\nThey include [Ardenicë](https://bliptext.com/articles/ardenica-monastery) (Lushnjë), Berzanë (Lezhë), Gërdec and Berzi (Tiranë) and a cluster of toponyms along the route Berat-Tepelenë-Përmet.\nThe evolution of the ancient toponym Lychnidus into Oh(ë)r(id) ([city](https://bliptext.com/articles/ohrid) and [lake](https://bliptext.com/articles/lake-ohrid)), which is attested in this form from 879 CE, required an early long-standing period of Tosk Albanian–East South Slavic bilingualism, or at least contact, resulting from the Tosk Albanian [rhotacism](https://bliptext.com/articles/rhotacism) -n- into -r- and Eastern South Slavic [l-vocalization](https://bliptext.com/articles/l-vocalization) ly- into o-.\nThe name of the region [Labëri](https://bliptext.com/articles/lab-ria) resulted through the Slavic liquid metathesis: South Slavic *Labanьja being applied to the long vowels.\nSpecifically contextualized reflex results are placed in parentheses.\n\n## Development of Indo-European sonorants\nThe nasal sonorants *n̥ and *m̥ both rendered Early Proto-Albanian *a, which remains *a in modern Albanian (PIE *ǵʰh₂éns \"goose\" > EPA *gatā > Alb gatë \"heron\").\nLike EPA *a elsewhere, in some cases it was raised to *e, as seen in PIE *h₁ln̥gʷʰtós > EPA *lekta > Albanian lehtë (suffixed with -të).\n\n## Consonants\n\n## The development of IE dorsal consonants in Albanian\nIndo-European languages are traditionally divided into [two groups](https://bliptext.com/articles/centum-and-satem-languages) based on the development of the three series of [dorsal](https://bliptext.com/articles/dorsal-consonant) (often called \"[guttural](https://bliptext.com/articles/guttural)\") stops, viz.\nthe palatal (*ḱ *ǵ *ǵʰ), velar (*k *g *gʰ) and labiovelar (*kʷ *gʷ *gʷʰ) series.\nIn the \"centum\" languages (e.g. [Italic languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages), [Germanic languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/germanic-languages), [Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/greek-language)) the palatal series has merged with velar series, while the labiovelar series remained distinct; whereas in the \"satem\" languages ([Indo-Iranian languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-iranian-languages), [Balto-Slavic languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/balto-slavic-languages)), the labiovelars merged with the plain velars, while the palatals shifted to [sibilant](https://bliptext.com/articles/sibilant) consonants.\nMany Indo-Europeanists have classified Albanian as a satem language since it has dental fricatives /θ/ and /ð/ as the common reflex of the palatal series, while velar and labiovelar stops in most cases have merged.\nHowever, there is clear evidence that all three IE dorsal series remained distinct (at least before front vowels) in Proto-Albanian:\nIn the later phonological history of Albanian, the velars /k/ and /g/ were subject to further palatalizations.\nThe (partial) retention of the Proto-IE three-way contrast for dorsal stops is an archaic feature that links Albanian with the wider [Paleo-Balkanic group](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) and is shared with Messapic and Armenian.\n\n# Basic traits of Proto-Albanian grammar\n\n## Verb conjugation in Proto-Albanian and Old Gheg (Old Albanian)\n\n### Introduction; the present tense (thematic verbs), adaptation of borrowings and examples\nVerbs in Early Proto-Albanian (Early PA) and contemporary Albanian are divided into thematic verbs and athematic verbs, thus following this division from Proto-Indo-European (PIE).\nPA *-a in the first person singular of the present cannot come from PIE *-oh₂, since its reflex in Proto-Albanian would be *-e (if stressed) or *-ë (if unstressed).\nTherefore, *-a comes from dialectal PIE *-om.\nThe second and third person singular come from PIE *-esi, *-eti with the loss of PIE final *-i already occurred in pre-Albanian.\nThe second person plural has no reflex from PA but it was shaped later, between the passage from PA to Old Albanian; the modern ending -ni could come from *nū, a PA adverb meaning \"now\", identical to PIE *nū and Sanskrit nū; otherwise, it derives from the nasal verbal stem -nj- with a final *-i coming from the PA personal pronoun *jus, \"you (all)\".\nMost verb stems ending in a closed diphtong (-aj, -ej, -ij, -oj, -uj, -yj) in the singular come from a nasal stem in PA, ending in *-Cnj- or *-Vnj- (e.g., first person singular *-nja)-\nAs for the third person plural, the PIE thematic vowel *-o- mutates into PA *-i- perhaps due to the influence of the /i̯/ from the verbs in -oj- in the plural.\nMost [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin) (C**l**assica**l** [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin), Late [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin), Vu**l**ga**r** [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin)) ve**r**bs be**l**onging to the fi**r**st dec**l**ension (infinite -ā**r**e) we**r**e adapted into stems ending with PA *-ānj- (fi**r**st pe**r**son singu**l**a**r** *-ānja > O**l**d Gheg -onj > mode**r**n A**l**banian -oj) and, in **r**a**r**e**r** cases (usua**l****l**y ve**r**ba**l** **r**oots ending in **l**iquids, hence -**l**ā**r**e and -**r**ā**r**e), with PA *-enj- (> mode**r**n -ej-).\nAn example is modern këndoj modern -**oj**- and, in rarer cases, with -ej-. An example is modern fërg**oj** modern -ij-) and, in rarer cases, with -ej-.\nAn example is modern vij modern -is; the consonant /t/ was probably weakened to /s/ and the final /a/ was unstressed and thus lost).\nAn example is molis modern -as).\nThe remaining Proto-Slavic verbs were adapted into stems ending with *-itj- (> modern -is, -it).\nThe following examples, except for kap and jap, are all in Old Gheg, a dialect of Old Albanian, and show the verb declension in Old Albanian to trace an idea of the passage between PIE morphology and Proto-Albanian, which then evolved into Old Albanian:\n\n### The present tense (athematic verbs) and examples\nThe verb \"to be\" (jam PA *-wō; the alternative modern ending -ave comes from a modification of PIE genitive plural *-éh₂wōm through the feminine thematic vowel of the feminine *-éh₂-, thus reflecting the overlap with the feminine in the strong cases.\nThe ablative plural -esh comes from PA *-aisu, from PIE *-oysu.\nAblative in -t is common in North Gheg and it was transferred from the definite declension.\n\n### Examples of indefinite noun declension in PA (*a-stem)\n\n### Noun declension in the feminine indefinite\n* ā-stem nouns had a final *-ā in the nominative; this vowel was hit by vowel reduction and became -ë, which is the mark of the indefinite feminine words.\nThe two strong cases (nominative and accusative) already merged in Early PA. The plural of all weak cases comes from PA *-āi, which comes from PIE dative-locative *-éh₂i.\nThe nominative plural *-ā is identical to the nominative singular and comes from PIE *-éh₂s.\nIf the long vowel was stressed, it becomes contemporary Albanian -a, otherwise it becomes contemporary -ë.\nThe weak cases in PA were copied by analogy from the *a-stem nouns and show the thematic vowel of the feminine, *-éh₂-.\n\n### Examples of indefinite noun declension in Early PA (*ā-stem)\n\n## Some examples of adjectives in PA\nIn PA adjectival declension, all cases other than the nominative singular and plural were lost.\nAdjectives in PA had either masculine or feminine gender depending on the gender of the word they refer to.\nThe derivation of adjectives from PIE to Proto-Albanian follows all the rules for indefinite nouns.\nMasculine adjectives in PA usually ended in *-a in the singular (< PIE *-os), while their feminine counterparts usually ended in *-ā (< PIE *-éh₂); rarely, masculine adjectives ended in *-i.\nIn contemporary Albanian, masculine adjectives can either end in consonant or in -ë (< stressed PA *-a).\nAdjectives in contemporary Albanian always go in couple with the \"adjectival article\", a particle always found before the adjective.\nIt's declination in the masculine singular, feminine singular and plural is \"i, e, të\".\nThe adjectival article in the feminine comes from PA *ō(d) < PIE *ēd ~ *ōd (ablative sg. stem of PIE *ē- ~ *ō-); this particle was most likely a demonstrative.\n\n# Numerals in Proto-Albanian\n\n# Classification & isoglosses with other Indo-European branches\nThe closest language to Albanian is [Messapic](https://bliptext.com/articles/messapic-language), with which it forms a common branch titled Illyric in Hyllested & Joseph (2022).\nHyllested & Joseph (2022) in agreement with recent bibliography identify Greco-Phrygian as the IE branch closest to the Albanian-Messapic one.\nThese two branches form an areal grouping – which is often called \"Balkan IE\" – with Armenian.\nHyllested & Joseph (2022) identify the highest shared number of innovations between (Proto-)Albanian and (Proto-)Greek.\nInnovative creations of agricultural terms shared only between Albanian and Greek, such as *h2(e)lbh-it- 'barley' and *spor-eh2- 'seed', were formed from non-agricultural Proto-Indo-European roots through semantic changes to adapt them for agriculture.\nSince they are limited only to Albanian and Greek, they can be traced back with certainty only to their last common Indo-European ancestor, and not projected back into [Proto-Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european).\nA remarkable Greek/Albanian isogloss is a very ancient form for \"hand\": *mər-, cf.\nthe Albanian verb marr (\"hold\") and the Greek márē (\"hand\"), and also Greek márptō (\"grab\").\nA common [Balkan Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) root *aiğ(i)- (\"goat\") can be reflected in Albanian edh (\"goat, kid\") < PAlb *aidza and dhi (\"nanny goat) < PAlb *aidzijɑ̄ with Greek αἴξ (\"goat\", gen. αἰγός) and Armenian ayc (\"(nanny) goat\"). It has been noted that the Balkan IE root and all the alleged Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian roots with a meaning \"goat\" are likely to be not Proto-Indo-European, as they may all originate as independent and relatively early, post-PIE borrowings, from the substrate languages spoken by the [sedentary farmers](https://bliptext.com/articles/agrarian-society) who were encountered by immigrating Indo-European [pastoralists](https://bliptext.com/articles/pastoralism). The view of a substrate borrowing can be corroborated by areal words for \"goat\" in other IE languages, such as [Gothic](https://bliptext.com/articles/gothic-language) gaits (\"goat\") and [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin) haedus (\"kid\"), reflecting *gʰaid̯(-o)-, considered as a substrate word usually linked with [Semitic languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/semitic-languages) (cf.\n[Akkadian](https://bliptext.com/articles/akkadian-language) gadû, [Aramaic](https://bliptext.com/articles/aramaic-language) gaδiā ̄\"kid\"). However it was most likely not directly borrowed from Semitic, but from a European substrate language that in turn had loaned the word from a common third source. Hence it can be viewed as an old cultural word, which was slowly transmitted to different European languages, and then adopted by the newcoming Indo-European speakers. Within this scenario it should be remarked the exclusive sharing of a common proto-form between Albanian, Greek, and Armenian, which could have been borrowed at a pre-stage that was common to these languages.\nShortly after they had diverged from one another, Albanian, Greek, and Armenian, undoubtedly also underwent a longer period of contact (as can be seen, for example, in the irregular correspondence: Greek σκόρ(ο)δον, Armenian sxtor, xstor, and Albanian hudhër, hurdhë \"garlic\").\nFurthermore, intense Greek–Albanian contacts certainly have occurred thereafter.\nAn example of secondary derivations from Palaeo-Balkan linguistic contacts is the [Thracian](https://bliptext.com/articles/thracian-language) word σπίνος spínos 'a kind of stone, which blazes when water touches it' (i.e. 'lime'), attested in [Aristotle](https://bliptext.com/articles/aristotle) and [Theophrastus](https://bliptext.com/articles/theophrastus), with cognate Greek τίτανος ([Attic](https://bliptext.com/articles/attic-greek)) and κίττανος ([Doric](https://bliptext.com/articles/doric-greek)) 'gypsum, chalk, lime', stemming [PIE](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european-language) *k̑witn̥Hos 'white, whitish': although from the same [PIE](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european-language) root, Albanian shpâ(ni) 'lime, tartar' and Greek σπίνος 'lime' derive from a secondary origin as they were probably borrowed from [Thracian](https://bliptext.com/articles/thracian-language) due to phonetic reasons.\nIndeed, the original IE cluster *k̑w- yields Albanian s- before any vowel, while in Thracian it could yield sp-.\nSpecifically Indo-Iranian/Greek/Albanian and Greek/Armenian/Albanian isoglosses are both relatively rare, examples including ndaj (to divide; Indo-Greek-Albanian) and ëndërr (\"dream\"; Greek/Armenian/Albanian).\nArmenian/Albanian isoglosses are considered \"insignificant\" by Orel.\nThere are a considerable number of Indo-Iranian/Albanian isoglosses, which are notably often connected with horses, horse tending, and milk products.\nIn older literature, Orel (2000) argues that Albanian has a large number of [isoglosses](https://bliptext.com/articles/isoglosses) that are common to Albanian, [Germanic](https://bliptext.com/articles/germanic-languages), [Baltic](https://bliptext.com/articles/baltic-languages) and [Slavic](https://bliptext.com/articles/slavic-languages), as part of a \"North Eastern\" lexical grouping, with a large number of these referring to [wood](https://bliptext.com/articles/wood) or objects made out of [wood](https://bliptext.com/articles/wood).\nOrel (1998) noted 24 isoglosses between Balto-Slavic and Albanian, 48 common words between Baltic and Albanian and 24 between Albanian and Slavic.\nHyllested & Joseph (2022) review Orel's common items and argue that a substantial number don't have convincing etymologies or do not constitute isoglosses between Balto-Slavic and Albanian.\nAn example is Albanian murg (dark) and Lithuanian margas (colourful) which Orel considers to be isoglosses but both are equally related to Proto-Germanic *murkaz, ancient Greek ἀμορβός amorbos and Proto-Slavic *mergъ.\nOrel identifies only one Albanian/[Italic](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages)/[Celtic](https://bliptext.com/articles/celtic-languages) isogloss, blertë (\"green\"), cognate to [Latin](https://bliptext.com/articles/latin) flōrus (\"bright\") and [Irish](https://bliptext.com/articles/irish-language) blár (\"gray\").\nSpecifically Celtic/Albanian vocabulary was previously thought to be limited although including at least one core vocabulary item (hënë \"moon\", cognate to Welsh cann \"white\" and Breton cann \"full moon\"), but recent work by Trumper in 2018 has proposed a larger though still not overwhelming set, with the notable addition of dritë (\"light\").\nAlthough knowledge of [Tocharian](https://bliptext.com/articles/tocharian-languages) is fragmentary, the one known Albanian/[Tocharian](https://bliptext.com/articles/tocharian-languages) isogloss is \"very important\" as noted by Orel: kush (\"who\", cognate to [Tocharian](https://bliptext.com/articles/tocharian-languages) A kus, with the same meaning).\n\n## Citations","revisionCount":0},"hasMore":false,"nextCursor":null}