# Lithuanian/Latvian - their relation?



## jonquiliser

Hi all

I had always heard that Latvian and Lithuanian were Slavic languages, that had nothing to do with Estonian or other Finno-ugric languages. However, recently I read a little on Wikipedia, where they claim that Lithuanian and Latvian form their own group, baltic languages (as a subgroup of balto-slavic languages), and that speakers of these met with speakers of proto-finnic languages whose language they "assimilated to varying degrees" (or the other way around) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_languages). 

So what I wonder now is, are Lithuanian and Latvian mutually intelligible? And do speakers of these languages understand (even if only simple or superficial things) other Slavic languages (Polish, as an example as Poland is geographically near), and; are there similarities with Estonian (a finno-ugric language)?

Thanks, folks!


----------



## deine

Lithuanian and Latvian are baltic languages   They are quite similar but of course many things are different. We can understand just very simple things of eath other languages. 
Some words are very similar. For example:
Good afternoon
Laba diena (Lithuanian)
Labdien (Latvian)

To be
Būti (Lithuanina)
Būt (Latvian)

There is nothing common with Estonian language. And with slavic languages too.


----------



## Flaminius

> [A]re Lithuanian and Latvian mutually intelligible?


No they aren't.  Latvian and Lithuanian seem to have been separate languages since 5th to 7th century CE, according to the much cited opinion of Kazimieras Būga.


----------



## jonquiliser

Thank you for your answers - I was a little curious about this all!


----------



## Spectre scolaire

Flaminius said:
			
		

> Latvian and Lithuanian seem to have been separate languages since 5th to 7th century CE, according to the much cited opinion of Kazimieras Būga.


Since I cannot open the link – certain censors don’t want me to know too much about Baltic languages  - I wonder if this “opinion” is to be found somewhere else on the web. What I would like to know is how Lithuanian (which exhibits ostensible archaic features) “crept into a nut-shell”, as it were, whereas Latvian obviously continued to develop along lines that are common in other Indo-European languages. I can’t see any obvious historical or geographical reasons why Lithuanian was being isolated as a language and presents itself today as _gefundenes fressen_ for Indo-European scholars alongside Sanskrit, Classical Greek, Classical Armenian, Latin, Tocharian B, Gothic, Old Irish, Hittite, and whatever more. Among more contemporary languages, the value of Lithanuan for comparative linguistic purposes can only be emulated by _Ossetic_ (which is why I didn't mention Avesta above). 

But _*Ossetic is*_ – mutatis mutandis - almost as _*isolated*_ as Burushaski or Andaman... _*Lithuanian is not!*_ 

Enigma! 
​


----------



## e-dre

Distinction between dialects of Baltic languages is similar to that difference between Slavic languages.
Baltic languages have been very conservative and preserved archaisms.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_intelligibility


Personally, I better understand ancient Greek than Latvian, and in childhood, when I was not familiar to Latin, I could understand written Latvian words to same degree as Latin. Though Latvian accentuation system (on the first syllable, as borrowed from finnic) has changed pronunciation a lot, and Latvian phonetics to me sounds similar to Estonian until I catch any familiar root, or find an affricate, "b", "d", "g" or so... And I believe, that Latvian guys understand Lithuanian better, than vice versa, though it is my personal experience, not ordinar to another Lithuanian speakers.


----------

