So, what do you think about my alternative interpretation of the Croatian toponyms?

http://flatassembler.000webhostapp.com/toponyms.html

I think that knowledge of Croatian isn't necessary to evaluate it, but that knowledge of linguistics is.

5 minutes ago, FlatAssembler said:

So, what do you think about my alternative interpretation of the Croatian toponyms?

http://flatassembler.000webhostapp.com/toponyms.html

I think that knowledge of Croatian isn't necessary to evaluate it, but that knowledge of linguistics is.

I would suggest that you submit this to an appropriate journal for review. I have studied some linguistics but I am not going to comment on Slavic historical linguistics.

Quote

However, I think there aren't actually that many Slavic toponyms in Croatia. If there were, they would make sense to those who speak Croatian, and the vast majority of them don't. 

That doesn't make sense. By that logic, all slavic languages should be mutually intelligible. 

Also, there are place names in England, say, which have Old English names but which are not transparent to modern English speakers. (The same is true for every country and language, as far as I know.)

I'm Croatian and I didn't understand anything you wrote.

I would suggest that you submit this to an appropriate journal for review.

Which particular journal do you have in mind?

By that logic, all slavic languages should be mutually intelligible.

Well, they are mutually intelligible to a much greater extent than, for instance, Germanic languages.

Also, there are place names in England, say, which have Old English names but which are not transparent to modern English speakers.

Yes, of course there are, but not the vast majority of them, as in Croatia. In Croatia, almost no toponyms make sense to those who speak Croatian, yet mainstream etymology connects them to Slavic roots.

I'm Croatian and I didn't understand anything you wrote.

What exactly do you not understand? Perhaps I can clarify if you specify.

47 minutes ago, FlatAssembler said:

Which particular journal do you have in mind?

Don't know. Not my field.

48 minutes ago, FlatAssembler said:

Well, they are mutually intelligible to a much greater extent than, for instance, Germanic languages.

Do you have some data to support that?

Don't know. Not my field.

I've made a thread about my theory on linguistforum.com, and the comments there aren't really so negative.

Do you have some data to support that?

Well, Proto-Germanic was spoken around 500 BC, and Proto-Slavic was spoken around 450 CE.
Besides, as far as I know, of the Slavic languages, only the South Slavic languages were ever spoken in Croatia. So, that puts the date even later. If a Croatian toponym really has a Slavic origin, chances are, it would be transparent in modern-day Croatian. Yet the majority of the Croatian toponyms aren't.

44 minutes ago, FlatAssembler said:

I've made a thread about my theory on linguistforum.com, and the comments there aren't really so negative.

Good.

59 minutes ago, Strange said:

Good.

Though, almost all of those comments mentioned they are not experts in that specialized field.

47 minutes ago, FlatAssembler said:

Though, almost all of those comments mentioned they are not experts in that specialized field.

Are you expert in this specialized field by yourself.. ?

 

34 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Are you expert in this specialized field by yourself.. ?

 

No. So what? Ideas are right or wrong independent of their creators. Me not being an expert in Slavic historical linguistics doesn't mean my interpretations of the Croatian toponyms are wrong.

Anyway, I contacted Dubravka Ivsic (perhaps the most prominent Croatian linguist these days) via e-mail and posted her replies on the web-page. You can see them by clicking the "show/hide details" links.
I've also edited the web-page to present my theory better, perhaps it's a bit easier to understand now.