>>18487827
They never spoke Turkic, they were already speaking a heavily slavicized romance language by then.

>>18487828
by Bulgarian I meant Eastern South Slavic vernacular

>>18487827
>Slavs come to the Balkans
>Romanized Thracians mix with them
>Thracians are better shepherds, Slavs are better farmers
>Vlachs descend from male Thracians and female Slavs
>Bulgarians descend from male Slavs and female Thracians
>Vlachs prefer the high grounds, hills and mountains as grazing lands so they mostly hang around the Carpathian
>Bulgarian farmers prefer the safety of having the fortified cities and the Danube as a natural border against steppe fucks
>Any "stray" Bulgarians/ Vlachs get assimilated by the dominant group in their region

>>18487827
>Romanians
>Bulgarian
It's interesting to imagine into what kind of language the Slavic idioms of modern Romania would've developed, had it not been completely replaced by the Romance language we call Romanian today. I'm not entirely sure it would've been classified as South Slavic.

>>18488218
But how did the shepherds manage to impose their language on the farmers when the majority lives in the plains and all the major civilization centers like cities marketplaces and castles, most of which have Slavic names, are in the plains? Language shifts usually happen the other way around. Clearly something strange happened in Romania.

>>18488252
>all the major civilization centers like cities marketplaces and castles
were administered by latins for some two centuries so I guess the vulgar latin language stuck as official

>>18488252
That's precisely why, any settlement north of the Danube that was placed in the plains was exposed to nomadic raids.
Most vocabulary Romanian got from Slavic is administrative, religious or related to things Slavs were better at, like farming.
Most vocabulary Romanian got from Latin is a mix of terms used in traditionally "vlach" jobs and military slang (e.g. the Romanian word for "old man" comes from the Latin word for "veteran", not the one for "elder").
Pretty much all early description of Vlachs emphasize they were semi-nomadic frontiersmen who mostly worked as shepherds or caravan guards or whatever but always in low density places.
Vlachs only got their own states after the Hungarians encouraged them to carve out some buffer states following the decline of the Golden Horde, most of Wallachian and Moldavian nobility moved in FROM Transylvania, were they previously served in a similar role as the Szekelys (defend the border, get benefits like tax exemptions).
Also noteworthy is that most of the settlements founded by Vlachs use Latin-derived names (e.g. Campulung - campus + longus).
My guess is that Slavic settlements got heavily depopulated but due to prolonged contact and interaction the Vlachs still used the original names of those settlements (imagine if most Italians died tomorrow and Anglos moved into Italy, they'd still be calling the cities Rome, Milan, Florence).
Basically south of the Danube it was more stable and safe and this encouraged Vlachs to move into cities and settlements over time and adopt the Slavic language, north of the Danube shit sucked until the 14th century but Vlachs ended up surviving and booming in population enough while serving under the Hungarian crown to claim Wallachia and Moldavia and impose their language on whatever groups survived the Golden Horde.
That's just my guess though.
Basically Romanian is a thing for many of the same reasons Welsh is a thing while other Britons died out

>>18487827
you got it backwards

File: The Vlach Have Near-Ent. (...).png (2.64 MB, 1761x850)

2.64 MB PNG

The entirety of the "Romans" on the peninsula and North of the Danube were domesticated urbanites who resided in the cities, and were subsequently Slavicized by the conquering Slavs who had imposed their culture, institutions, and language upon them. The premise of domesticated urbanized Romans forsaking their urban lifestyle and herding goats is mythologized pseudohistory revisionism, and omits the fact that Slavs practiced a hybridized economy (pastoralism and agriculture, including transhumance pastoralism, as was the case with the Ezerites and the Melingoi in the Peloponesse). The "Vlach", originally smaller Slavic tribes from what was known as "Magna Thessaly, were fully attuned to pastoralism in the aftermath of the Nomos Georgikos, the Roman land reform that heavily favored larger Slavic tribes at the expense of smaller ones. The descendants of these "Progenitor Vlach" macro-group are mentioned in the Zicka Inscriptions in Serbia, and have 99% Slavic names, and 100% Slavic titles, and were monophone (Slavophone).

>male Thracians and female Slavs
Romanians, like Bulgarians, are majority I2a + R1a (46% of their modern-day Y-DNA), and share the same (South Slavic) ethnography and tangible and intangible civilization patterns.

>Hills and mountains
The vast majority of elevation toponyms are of SLAVIC origin, including the toponymy of ground elevations in mainland Greece.

>Were administered by Latins for some two centuries
The entirety of the pre-Phanariot elites in Wallachia and Moldova were families of Slavic origin, and the major cities in Wallachia and Moldova were Slavic, too, including "Campulung", which is a neo-Latinized renaming of "Dugopolje".

>Much of the early description
They also contain strictly Slavic names and titles, and the earliest recorded Vlach rulers had names like "Berivoj", Slavota, Dobromir, and Ivanko. These men weren't originally Latinophone.

File: Romanian Was Originally A(...).png (171 KB, 909x894)

171 KB PNG

>>18488252
>Clearly something strange happened in Romania.
Organized Latinization efforts first began during the reign of the Phanariot elites, who were instrumental in dislodging Wallachia and Moldova from the Medieval Slavic civilization and introduced "modernization" based on the pattern of Western civilization and the distancing from the Russian Empire (and fostering closer relations with France and the Habsburgs). The process of Latinization reached its peak during the late 1800s, when Junimea (together with the liberal Latinophone, urbanized Romanian elites in Transylvania) essentially ripped the Slavic vocabulary (which to that point, comprised 45.7% of the vocabulary, while Latin comprised less than 20%, based on the first modern Daco-Romanian dictionary (also, a primary linguistic source) by Alexandru Cihac, directly cited by Graham Mallinson in the book "Romance Languages 1988") to around 20%, and engorged the Latin vocabulary (with French, Italian, and High Latin borrowings and neologisms) to around 60% (Communist Romania increased the Latin vocabulary to around 85%, based on that one dictionary from 1958 with 48K entries).

In Trask's Historical Linguistics, it's asserted that Western linguists originally attested Romanian as a Slavic/Slavonic language thanks to how grossly Slavicized it was (this is before the aforementioned peak of Latinization efforts). We see the same confirmation in Yakov Ginkulov's Wallacho-Romanian dictionary (written several decades before Cihac's dictionary), where he attests that the Romanian language is essentially primarily Slavic with a bigger Latin substrate (further attesting to the abovementioned Latinization efforts).