Introducing Latvia

[Temujin]

In your mind.

In my mind you are also not capable to engage in a constructive logical discussion finding bits and pieces of inaccurate or completely irrelevant information. The post above was a good example.

[Pure ja]

Some of Toprov's work on Finno-Ugric toponyms was questioned (by who?), therefore all his work is in doubt? That's not how it works in the field of linguistics, history or archeology.
Toporov was a renowned linguist in Russia and around the world making significant contribution to the body of knowledge in linguistics.

To err is human.

[Pure ja]

Let's look back what you wrote.

There are 3 hypothesis on etymology of Moscow (Moskva). The name is pronounced as 'Mask-va' in Russian.

- Baltic hypothesis supported by influential linguist V.N. Toporov
- Slavic hypothesis supported by several linguists who lived in the 19th c.
- Finno-Ugric hypothesis supported by S. K. Kuznetsova

Slavic and Finn-Ugric hypothesis received much criticism. Baltic hypothesis looks more plausible, but so does the Slavic one. Finno-Ugric hypothesis is the weakest one.

The name 'Moskva' is derived from the name of the river named Moskva which starts in eastern part of Smolensk oblast flowing east through Moscow city entering Oka River. The map of Moskva River: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Moskva_river.png

Fine. Let it be as you claim.

There were no Finno-Ugric tribes living in the proximity of Moscow city or Moscow River. Finno-Ugric tribe Merjaa settled in the north far-away from the Moscow River. Finno-Ugric tribe Muroma settled around Murom city which is also far away from Moscow River. The closest Finno-Ugric tribe was Meshera settled in Ryazan and Suzdal but Moscow River is not flowing through those regions either.

here you have been proven wrong, at least very likely so.

It was attested in the chronicles eastern Baltic tribe eastern Galindians settled on Protva River. Also, archaeologists discovered many archeological items near Mozhaysk situated on Moscow River attributing them to eastern Galindians . See the map posted above by another user on which archeological findings marked with small circles around Mozhaysk located on Moscow River.

Those archeological findings are marked as Dyakovo items and centered outside of the Galindian region. Dyakovo was very likely volga finnic, as I have argued.

Also, note that in that picture
http://www.melc.lt/lietuva/tauta/zem...hp?ZId=9&id=43
there is a baltic influence periphery, but no finno-ugric influence periphery is shown. One of your mistakes is to never consider the opposite direction, even if it sticks straight into your eye - look at the Dyakovo items.

Linguist Toporov argued there are numerous Baltic hydronyms found to the west of Moscow River many of which are ending with '-va' such as Vod-va, Nad-va, Ded-va, Bol-va, Tit-va, Drez-va and others. Toporov considered Moskva and Protva to be extensions of Baltic hydronyms.

As I have shown the -va ending is insufficient to make such a claim. You can make the claim, of course, but the case is still wide open.
So what else did Toporov actually claim in regard with Moskva?

Moskva may mean swampy or moist but it's not from Finno-Ugric but from Slavic derived from the term 'mozg' - moist. Compare it to 'mosk-va'. Russians are still using the phrase 'pro-mozg do kostei’ - 'becoming wet to the bones'. The phrase is pronounced as 'pra-mosk da kastei', where 'pro-' is a prefix.

Circumstantial evidence.
The case is still open. The Dyakovo settlements favour the volga finnic origin.

PS. The estonian equivalents to the russian 'mozg' are 'märg' and 'niisk(e)'. These forms are less similar to Moskva, but then again it is not at all clear that Moskva derives from 'mozg'. It could derive from a (volga) finnic 'mosk'.

[Pure ja]

That etymology is not based on just the typical Baltic suffix. In the book of Italian linguist Pietro Umberto Dini "Baltic languages" it says that "Toporov was weighing Moscow's Baltic etymology (compare Lithuanian "mazgoti" to wash) that would be a remnant of Eastern Galindians".

And what was his explanation for the change from 'Mozg'/'Mazg' to 'Mosk'?

And what was his reason to discard the volga finnic 'mosk'?

[Pure ja]

I remind you the term Moscow is derived from the name of Moscow river which flows from eastern Smolensk (western Russia) towards Moscow city turning south towards Tula and western Ryazan.

A river can just as well be named after the lower sink end, not just by the source end. Or it could be named on an entirely different matter.

For example the old finnic name for Velikaya is Isso (=large, father). You and some of your baltic colleagues here would surely argue that
Isso is just a translation from Velikaya. But you would be wrong, because Lake Peipus is also fed by Suur Emajõgi (the Great Mother river), which in turn is fed by Väike Emajõgi (Small Mother river) via Lake Võrtsjärv. The river Narva / Narova probably stems from narua / naruva / nõruva, meaning an umbilical cord.

Pskov comes from piiskova / piiskuva, meaning 'generating droplets', ejaculation, if you will.
Pihkva / Pihkova means essentially the same thing.
pihk = palm / hand
pihkuma = generating droplets, ejaculation
And the Lake Pskov is actually named Lämmijärv in estonian, meaning a lake of love / heat.

So we have a great father ejaculating droplets in (great) love, a great mother growing her stomach which also has an umbilical cord. And we also know that about 13 000 up to 14 500 years ago the ice lake at the spot of Lake Peipus + Lämmijärv first emptied itself via Võhandu + Mustjõe + Koiva (Gauja) into the Baltic Ice Lake (at bay of Riga), later on that Peipus ice lake joined with the Baltic ice lake via the strait that still later on became the river Suur Emajõgi.

And while the glaciers were melting and forming local ice lakes which later merged, isostatic rebound raised the land from under the water to above the water level. The first hilltops in Estonia to merge from the glacier / water were the highest mountains on the Haanja uplands, the highest of these might well have been the Suur Munamägi hill (the Great Egg Hill). That happened about 14 000 to 14 500 years ago.

And then we have the national epics of Kalevala and Kalevipoeg telling us the world creation myth with the water and egg. Mind you, these epics are based on folklore snippets collected from people around Finland, Karelia and Estonia, and not from single stories either. So don't even try to claim that the creation myth was made up.

PS. If the baltic finns supposedly had arrived from somewhere east (even more so if behind the Urals), then they would not have kept a localized creation myth. They would not have even known that there had been glaciers and ice lakes here and that mountains grew out from those ice lake waters.

[Inti]

Funny discussion.

[Temujin]

Fine. Let it be as you claim.

These were the claims of acclaimed linguists whom I referenced.

here you have been proven wrong, at least very likely so.

Dyakovo archaeological culture does not provide any evidence in relation to Moskva etymology.

Those archeological findings are marked as Dyakovo items and centered outside of the Galindian region. Dyakovo was very likely volga finnic, as I have argued.

Also, note that in that picture
http://www.melc.lt/lietuva/tauta/zem...hp?ZId=9&id=43
there is a baltic influence periphery, but no finno-ugric influence periphery is shown. One of your mistakes is to never consider the opposite direction, even if it sticks straight into your eye - look at the Dyakovo items.

I linked 3 "Goljadi" hydronyms found in metropolitan of Moscow city. The hydronyms existed since 13-14th century in the city. I suspect there are lots of them if we search for them in Moscow city itself. There is no doubt about strong presence of Slavic and Baltic hydronyms and toponyms in western Moscow and Moscow to people who have read on the subject. There are little Finno-Ugric toponyms and hydronms found in the aforementioned regions. This is also stated in the source which you quoted earlier to discredit Toporov's linguistic expertise but failed to read the source in its entirety. Your source states what I wrote earlier about Finno-Ugric toponyms and hydronyms found in central Russia.

The territory of the Merya people, defined mainly according to archeological data, comprised, besides almost the entiry present Jaroslavl's Province, a considerable part of the Kostroma, Ivanovo and Vladimir Provinces, including small territories in both Tver' Provinces.
Source: http://www.helsinki.fi/venaja/nwruss...f/Ahlqvist.pdf

And that small area in Moscow oblast is eastern and north-eastern which are a fair distant from Moscow city and the banks of Moscow river.

As I have shown the -va ending is insufficient to make such a claim. You can make the claim, of course, but the case is still wide open.
So what else did Toporov actually claim in regard with Moskva?

You have not shown anything. The claims about the rivers ending with '-va' are not my claims either.

Circumstantial evidence.
The case is still open. The Dyakovo settlements favour the volga finnic origin.

There is no single linguist to my knowledge who linked Moskva hydronym to Dyakovo archeological culture from the early Iron age.

The estonian equivalents to the russian 'mozg' are 'märg' and 'niisk(e)'. These forms are less similar to Moskva, but then again it is not at all clear that Moskva derives from 'mozg'. It could derive from a (volga) finnic 'mosk'.

You may as well start searching for linguistic similarities in Americas or New Guinea.

[Temujin]

A river can just as well be named after the lower sink end, not just by the source end. Or it could be named on an entirely different matter.

For example the old finnic name for Velikaya is Isso (=large, father). You and some of your baltic colleagues here would surely argue that
Isso is just a translation from Velikaya. But you would be wrong, because Lake Peipus is also fed by Suur Emajõgi (the Great Mother river), which in turn is fed by Väike Emajõgi (Small Mother river) via Lake Võrtsjärv. The river Narva / Narova probably stems from narua / naruva / nõruva, meaning an umbilical cord.

Pskov comes from piiskova / piiskuva, meaning 'generating droplets', ejaculation, if you will.
Pihkva / Pihkova means essentially the same thing.
pihk = palm / hand
pihkuma = generating droplets, ejaculation
And the Lake Pskov is actually named Lämmijärv in estonian, meaning a lake of love / heat.

So we have a great father ejaculating droplets in (great) love, a great mother growing her stomach which also has an umbilical cord. And we also know that about 13 000 up to 14 500 years ago the ice lake at the spot of Lake Peipus + Lämmijärv first emptied itself via Võhandu + Mustjõe + Koiva (Gauja) into the Baltic Ice Lake (at bay of Riga), later on that Peipus ice lake joined with the Baltic ice lake via the strait that still later on became the river Suur Emajõgi.

And while the glaciers were melting and forming local ice lakes which later merged, isostatic rebound raised the land from under the water to above the water level. The first hilltops in Estonia to merge from the glacier / water were the highest mountains on the Haanja uplands, the highest of these might well have been the Suur Munamägi hill (the Great Egg Hill). That happened about 14 000 to 14 500 years ago.

And then we have the national epics of Kalevala and Kalevipoeg telling us the world creation myth with the water and egg. Mind you, these epics are based on folklore snippets collected from people around Finland, Karelia and Estonia, and not from single stories either. So don't even try to claim that the creation myth was made up.

PS. If the baltic finns supposedly had arrived from somewhere east (even more so if behind the Urals), then they would not have kept a localized creation myth. They would not have even known that there had been glaciers and ice lakes here and that mountains grew out from those ice lake waters.

You either start quoting the works of linguists whose area of expertise are Slavic, Baltic or Finno-Ugric languages publishing on hydronym Moskva irrespective of linguists' ethnicity or nationality or you are making fool of yourself drawing parallels to epic stories from Karelia and Estonia.

[Pure ja]

You either start quoting the works of linguists whose area of expertise are Slavic, Baltic or Finno-Ugric languages publishing on hydronym Moskva irrespective of linguists' ethnicity or nationality or you are making fool of yourself drawing parallels to epic stories from Karelia and Estonia.

I still haven't got any further reasoning besides the -va ending why Toporov considered Mosk+va as baltic.
You better start quoting the works of Toporov or you are making a fool of yourself.

As to the creation myths, that is merely to show that a continuity theory is quite feasible; and that the Velikaya, Koiva and Väina watersheds were once finnic. And that one should not necessarily fixate on the SOURCE of the river Moskva to try to explain the etymology of Mosk+va.

And by inference, if the continuity theory hold up and the Väina and Velikaya (Isso) watersheds were finnic, then also inevitably the watershed crossings near Smolensk had to be finnic. And thus the past origin of Galindians is wide open, just as with latgalians.

[Temujin]

I still haven't got any further reasoning besides the -va ending why Toporov considered Mosk+va as baltic.
You better start quoting the works of Toporov or you are making a fool of yourself.

V.N Toporov. Ancient Moscow in Baltic perspective//Balto-Slavic studies 1981 - Science 1982, pages 3-61 published by the Russian Academy of Sciences.

There are hundreds of Baltic hydronyms on the map around Moskva River. V Toporov provides provided a thorough discussion on Moskva hydronym. (pp 3-61)

http://www.inslav.ru/images/stories/...%281982%29.pdf

As to the creation myths, that is merely to show that a continuity theory is quite feasible; and that the Velikaya, Koiva and Väina watersheds were once finnic. And that one should not necessarily fixate on the SOURCE of the river Moskva to try to explain the etymology of Mosk+va.

You are ridiculous with your 'conitinuity theory' and other 'arguments' such as early Iron age Dyakovo archeological culture in the context of Moskva etymology discussion. Do you even realise this?