Даките

[Joan_Of_Arc]

Извинявам се, че безпокоя форума по такава тема, но имам спор с един румънец относно възможността даките да са предци на днешното румънско население.

По-долу е неговото мнение:

.
Who the hell are you to call me arrogant and funny when I talk about my ancestors, the Dacians?

I gave you an answer at that article, now I want to make you cry. I hope you speak some Romanian, if not, you'll remain stupid and ignorant and never understand the truth the way it is.

You see, my dear, in the XIX century there were some tablets discovered in Romania,

containing the language of the Dacians: http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/petan/index.html

Now, if you do search the internet, many will say they are fake. Bad news for you: they definitely aren't. It's just Romanian's enemies wishful thinking.

Even worse for you, they've been partially translated and they are 80 to 90 percent similar to Romanian.

So, don't you dare to call me funny and arrogant if you have no idea what you're talking about.

Some translated tablets are here, enjoy:

http://dacia.org/forum.php?homeinclude=topicdetails&forum_id=5&category_id=13&post_id=214

Въпросът ми е прост за някой специалист, но аз не съм професионалист на тема даки - доколко е възможно това, защото доколкото имам спомени в Румъния за един изключително дълъг преиод от време се говори и пише на черковнославянски, а и сведенията за даките изчезват доста по-рано от населяването на днешните румънски земи от т.нар. влашки племена.

Ще ви бъда благодарен за повече информация.

[Guy de Mont Ferrand]

http://forum.boinaslava.net/showthread.php?t=9581&highlight=%EF%F0%EE%E8%E7%F5%EE%E4+%E2%EB%E0%F1%E8%F2%E5

[Sula]

Жана, момчето хубаво се гордее с това, че е потомък на даките (то едни други твърдят, че са преки наследници на Александър Велики), но му обърни внимание на "доказателството", което той сам ти цитира.

"The detailed analyses of the samples extracted from all the 35 surviving artefacts, performed at the Institute of Nuclear Physics in Bucharest, stated that the composition of the plates is typical for the printing lead from the second half of the nineteenth century." Иначе историята как те били препечатани от златни плочки е затрогваща, но за жалост недоказуема.

При такава постановка съвсем не е чудно защо: "Specialists have lacked interest in the written pieces for more than a century and most of the archive is now lost. At this moment there is no official program or project for studying and protecting these intriguing testimonies."

Не се съмнявай, че ако имаше поне малък изглед тези таблици да са оригинални, то съвременните румънски историци ала Йорга и ала Бюлей щяха да проглушат ушите на света с откритието си.

Нещо повече самият автор ти казва, че "The language of the texts has somehow an Indo-European appearance, but it is not like the expected Dacian language: that language seems to have nothing in common with the known remains of the Romanian substratum."

При това положение питай гордия дак, защо днешния румънски изобилства с романизирани думи и има латинизирана граматика или и те като други съседи са се правили хиляди години на друг народ, само за да изплуват целите в бяло?

Поздрави и успех!

[Joan_Of_Arc]

Последното развитие на нещата - за съжаление още преди да се консултирам със специалистите от форума му изпратих следното:

Dear Mister,



This proves what? From what has been said and done the Dacian has not been translated by any scholar. Partially translated does not even begin to cover it. By your logic I may say that we Bulgarians are Thracians due to lot of leftover Thracian names and words in our language.

If you are Dacian as you claim then explain me this. Where did the real Dacians go for the period of the so-called Dark ages? And if they were there as you might say why is not there a single document for more than 1800 years written in Dacian after maybe around 2 century A.D.

And why was the Cyrillic alphabet widely used in the lands of modern Romania for more than 8 centuries?

Next time dont tell me who I am and call me stupid as I am pretty certain I know YOUR history better than you do.

Не се гордея с текста но бях достатъчно бесен в тоя момент.

Отговора му беше брилянтен:

When I say partially translated I mean they are in work right now, as we are speaking. Some of them are fully translated by scholars and published there. Some of them are still difficult to grasp. Some of them contain bulgarian words. Some of them are written in plain Romanian. Actually all of them, it's just that many words are unknown yet. They have a Romanian grammar, vocabulary and especially STRUCTURE.

It actually proves a lot, if the language is 80 to 90 percent similar, it means there is a continuity and we are the same people. Where were the Dacians in the Dark Ages? Simple, Wallachian (and later Romanian) was another name for them. They were here all the time. And they don't need documents to prove anything to people like you, they became a very rural civilization during those Dark Ages. If they did not leave documents it doesn't prove anything. They left the language almost intact, that's what I care.

You have no idea about history, just started to learn something today, assuming you read those links.

Some more bad news: you have absolutely nothing to do with the Thracians, other than some normal genetic heritage, the Thracians were and are the Aromanians. I stand ready to prove this to you with more than 20 inskriptions written thousands of years ago, from the Balkan Peninsula. Starting with the Ezerovo Ring, the Lemnos Stele and many more, they are all plain Aromanian. That's all you have: leftovers. We have the full grammar of Dacian and Old-Macedonian.

The Dacians were using the Greek alpabet, I was trying to explain this to you but looks like you are too dumb to understand. Cyrillic is more Dacian than it is bulgarian. So, that's why we used it, because it was ours. You had no Cyrillic alphabet when you came here, that monk did not invent anything. Just look at those published tablets. They are all fully translated. After you read there, you will know some history and you'll realize you knew nothing when it comes to Romanian history.

След подобно изявление предпочетох да си замълча. Но след текстовете, които Сула така любезно ми посочи ( за което благодаря) му изпратих писмо с въпроси, на което смятам, че категорично няма да отговори

Извинявам се, Ги, не се бях сетил за темата за историята и произхода на власите (която дори следях за известно време преди да навлезе в лингвистичните отклонения).

Напоследък съм доста разсеян и високомерен. Благодаря за подсказките наистина. Страхотни сте.

Смятам, че няма нужда повече от тази тема, поради което моля за намеса на модератор и заключването и.