Reconstruction talk:Proto-Pomeranian/Triglav

Origins of deity name
, how did you decide that the deity is named after the hill? It would have been pretty convenient coincidence that the mound, which gives the name of the deity that personifies Trinity, has 3 in its name as well. Безименен (talk) 22:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)


 * This is definitely not a coincidence, these two names are in direct relationship with each other. Triglav as "trinity" is not very popular view, and it is pretty far-fetched. The most popular view is that Triglav is a chthonic deity. This god was probably named after the mountain on which his cult was located because (1) word for mountains reconstructable for Proto-Slavic, word for god is not, (2) it might be Polabian influence, Polabians renamed many Common Slavic gods due to taboo or for political reasons (old gods are not helping, lets make new ones). Gods that are attested for Polabians only are believed to be Polabian only. Sławobóg (talk) 23:10, 2 March 2023 (UTC)


 * The trinity theory may be "not very popular" and "far-fetched" according to you, but somehow it's the only theory mentioned in (at least) some books on Slavic mythology. It seems your perception of popularity differs from what others think. Furthermore: the primary meaning of 🇨🇬 is 'three-headed'. This meaning is suitable both for oronyms and for theonyms. Polabians could have intended this semantics to name their deity, rather than calling it after a local toponym. I don't say it's impossible, but it is nonetheless peculiar. For example, do you think the deity would have been named after the nearby hillock, if it was called 'Golo brdo' or 'Kriva mogyla'?
 * Oh well, I thought that "this view is not very popular" is different from "this view doesn't exist" but you are right, I'm wrong on this one. Now I know that unpopular views are non-existing views. Thanks. 👍 You are that that is suitable for theonym, but again, word for mountains was Proto-Slavic, meanwhile Triglav arose long time after Proto-Slavic disintegration. That idea assumes that yet pagan people named the hill after Triglav, and we have no evidence for Slavs doing that, all these toponyms related to deities arose after christianization. Also, it is not "peculiar", Rujevit was named after island Rojana, Roja (> Rugen), Latin Pripegala (< *Pribyglovъ) has probable Serbian equivalent in the village Privina Glava, and Polabian goddesss Siwa derives from Proto-Slavic given name . So you lack basic knowledge on the subject. Also, I'm not sure if any source cleary states that the hills were called that way, I'll make small changes. Sławobóg (talk) 18:28, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

RFV discussion: March–April 2023
In 1941, Afanasii M. Selischev in his monograph ''Slavic Linguistics. Vol. 1. West Slavic languages in the section Poles and Pomorians (Kashubians) [introduction]'' on page 273‒294 mentions the works of Friedrich Lorentz:


 * 1) 1906, About the Pomerelian (Old Kashubian) language until the half of the 15 century, pages 53‒117;
 * 2) 1912, The extinct dialect of Pomeranian, pages 140‒161.

Nowhere in the two works does the term Proto-Pomeranian occur, however <прапоморскаго> on page 143.

Similar examples of this reconstruction can be given from the first work:
 * Pages 59‒60: -borъ: A Pomeranian name in the vicinity of Regenwald: Cziliborus 1288, i. e. Cilibor or Zilibor. An Obotrites name Ratibor 1035, &c.

Pinging:, , , , &c. Gnosandes ❀ (talk) 16:49, 2 March 2023 (UTC)


 * So you're RFV'ing this based on a wording, which Requests_for_moves,_mergers_and_splits and passed? Vininn126 (talk) 17:00, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Both against the term and against reconstruction. I think that in these 3 books everything is written in detail. Gnosandes ❀ (talk) 17:28, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * You realize that has no bearing on this RFV? Vininn126 (talk) 17:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Why? For example, I can doubt the reconstruction of *Triglav, which perhaps should be like *Triglavъ or *Trigьlavъ. The issue has not been worked out at all. Gnosandes ❀ (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Close enough. I don’t see an issue. Also you are wrong about the ъ, already had its effect. And we don’t need any specific claim in a reference work to make a reconstruction, we are consequential here in assuming certain words for a language we assume in general. Fay Freak (talk) 22:17, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
 * How did you learn something about Havlík's law without a system? You might as well reconstruct anything. Gnosandes ❀ (talk) 11:38, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I think you do not understand what this is about, and I don't understand what are you talking about either. Sławobóg (talk) 19:08, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Neither do I. I don't see how the name we use for the language is relevant here. Theknightwho (talk) 19:23, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Likewise. Nicodene (talk) 13:25, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

RFV-Passed. Vininn126 (talk) 14:53, 5 April 2023 (UTC)