Protests in Zagreb

[FlatAssembler]

I don't see what a lack of knowledge regarding current separatist movements in Croatia has to with historical linguistics.

That's not what I meant. I meant to ask why you think you can have an informed opinion about Croatian historical linguistics based on the data from Wikipedia, when you realize you can't have an informed opinion about the separatist movements based on that?

For example, Messapian has been an extinct language since the first century, so it's unlikely to be that.

Messapian was a dialect of Illyrian or, at worst, a language closely related to Illyrian. And I think Illyrian was alive at least as late as the 12th century, after the Second Slavic Palatalization ceased to operate in Croatian, but before the Havlik's Law ceased to operate in Croatian. How would you explain away the mountain names Klek and Kalnik if not as late borrowings from Illyrian, from the same root as the ancient placenames Claudius (ancient name for Papuk) and Celenae (ancient name for Orolik)?

Wikipedia references are your friend.

Well, yes, but you can't just take what's written on Wikipedia for granted. It's a good starting point for the research about various topics, but that's all it is.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

That's not what I meant. I meant to ask why you think you can have an informed opinion about Croatian historical linguistics based on the data from Wikipedia, when you realize you can't have an informed opinion about the separatist movements based on that?

Because linguistics interests me more than Croatian separatist movements.  I could have an informed opinion on these movements, but I choose not to.

Messapian was a dialect of Illyrian or, at worst, a language closely related to Illyrian. And I think Illyrian was alive at least as late as the 12th century, after the Second Slavic Palatalization ceased to operate in Croatian, but before the Havlik's Law ceased to operate in Croatian. How would you explain away the mountain names Klek and Kalnik if not as late borrowings from Illyrian, from the same root as the ancient placenames Claudius and Celenae?

I don't need to explain these away, because these aren't the topic.  And the entire Illyrian group was extinct by the 6th century, not the 12th.

Well, yes, but you can't just take what's written on Wikipedia for granted. It's a good starting point for the research about various topics, but that's all it is.

I didn't say I take Wikipedia articles for granted.  I said Wikipedia references are your friend.  You know those little blue numbers in brackets scattered throughout Wikipedia articles?  Those are links to the outside sources on which the articles are based.  You know...references.

Boru

[FlatAssembler]

Because linguistics interests me more than Croatian separatist movements.

I understand that. Linguistics is a much harder science than political science.

And the entire Illyrian group was extinct by the 6th century, not the 12th.

Where is the evidence for that?

I said Wikipedia references are your friend.

OK, I've looked into the reference for the Hungarian origin. Well, the text there is rather unclear. Why does the author think that "Zabrag" is the older form of the name Zagreb, just because it's attested in Chronicle of the Hungarian Anonymous? The simplest explanation is that it's scriber error, given that in both the modern name and the earliest attested name 'g' comes before 'b'.
I agree with him that 'z' in those early attestations probably didn't stand for the 'z' sound, but I don't see any particular reason to assume it stood for the 'ch' sound. 'Z' was probably used to denote any sibilant affricate sound, like I've said, "Bizovci" was rendered in Latin documents as "Bisofzy", and here 'z' obviously denoted the 'ts' sound. The simplest explanation is that it stood for the 'dz' sound, which existed in Old Croatian, and it regularly changed to 'z' in Modern Croatian. The author there explains away the change from 'ch' to 'z' as "an incorrect reading of old attestations". Well, that implies that the name "Zagreb" wasn't used all along. Is there any evidence of that? There are folktales about how the name "Zagreb" came to be, some of them written down in the 18th century, that's not what we would expect if the name "Zagreb" wasn't widely used all that time.