I am attaching a short paragraph on Illyrians from a book written by Irish-American Indo-Europeanist James Mallory.[1] J. Mallory is a known scholar in his field of research. See the PDF attachement.

Mallory states:

Without actual Illyrian texts, we must content ourselves with regarding Albanian as an Illyrian language is merely a probably assumption (p. 74).

If there are no Illyrian texts and only personal and place names survived, which linguists settled that Albanian is a continuation of Illyrian dialect beyond doubt? Mallory didn't know about such 'settlements' at the time he was writing his book.  Mind you Illyrians were a confederation of many tribes not necessarily linguistically related.

1. Mallory, J. P. (1989). In Search of the Indo-Europeans: Language, Archaeology and Myth

Don't expect him to understand linguistic arguments. They are too much for his "arn avut damari". Note how he's unable to understand that the Albanian evolution Skodra>Shkoder, Scampinus > Shkumbin indicate that the terms were treated by the proto-Albanians as loanwords and not as genuine proto-albanian words.

He cannot understand that the pre-Latin "genuine" albanian sk- in this position undergoes the evolution sk>ks>h and that the evolution sk>shk in such positions corresponds to a chronologically later situation, that was was still operative when the first slavic loanwords have entered the language (show examples below).

He does not have the brain to understand the phonological stratification of the Albanian lexikon.

He does not have the brain to understand that the ancestor of the albanian language (which ever it may be) cannot have produced terms such as the Illyrian Skodra, Skerdilaidas, Skerdis, Scenus, Scenobar(b)us, Skerviaedus, Scardona (Skradin), Uskana, Skirtarti/Skirtones, Loiscus, Skardus.

In all these positions, the ancestor of Albanian would have yielded sk>ks>h, before the entrance of the latin loanwords in albanian, which show the new pattern sk>shk.

Serious Linguists (and not albanian pseudo-linguists like the one he posted) are crystall clear on that.

Proto-albanian *sk before voiced stops/occlusives (b,d,g), resonants (m,n,l,r), semivowels (w,j) and when no other consonant follows has evolved into *sk>ks>h before the entrance of the latin loanwords, where we see a totally different evolution *sk>shk.


Note in all these above cases the difference in the treatment of *sk between "native" pre-roman and later latin borrowed lexicon.

The same thing happens in the treatment of initial *s (Illyrian s vs. albanian *s>j>gj) and the same thing happens when we study the evolution fo the PIE diphthongs *au and *eu: Illyrian has preserved them, meanwhile Albanian has monophthongized them as has Daco-Thracian.

In the material we have from Illyrian, the above diphthongs have survived intact even in the Roman period: Taulanti, Beusas/Beuzas, Teuta, Temiteuta, Teutaia, Teuda, Iaulietis, Sausa, Clausal, Taulantii, anasauro, Autariatai, Deuri, Breuci, Ceraunii.

Albanian on the other hand has made the following monophthongizations: *au>a and *eu>e during it's early contact with the latin language (~ 100 BC- 100 AD):

latin aurum > ar
latin gaudium > gaz
latin paucus > pak


and from the "native" material:

*dhousos > dausa > dash (in albanian "ram" in the romanian substratum "lamb of the house")
*aug- > ag


(to be continued)