Dr. Harvey E. Mayer, February 1999:
Beaumont, CA 92223-2460
U.S.A.
1. The 373 Dacian-Thracian-Baltic roots discussed
by Duridanov.
2. The fitting of special Dacian and Thracian features
(which I identified from Duridanov’s listings) into Baltic isogloss patterns
so that I identified Dacian and Thracian as southeast Baltic. South
Baltic because, like Old Prussian, they keep unchanged the diphthongs ei,
ai,
en,
an
(north Baltic Lithuanian and Latvian show varying percentages of ei,
ai
to ie, and en,
an to 
, 
(to 
, 
)
in Lithuanian, to ie, uo in Latvian). East Baltic
because the Dacian word 
uvete
(now in Rumanian spelled juvete) has ,
not z as in west Baltic, and the Thracian word pušis (the Latin-Greek
transcription shows pousis which, I believe, reflects -š-.)
with zero grade puš- as in Lithuanian pušìs rather
than with e-grade *peuš- as in Prussian peus.
Zero grade in this word is east Baltic, e-grade here is west Baltic,
while the other word for “pine, evergreen”, preid
(Prussian and Dacian), priede (Latvian), is marginal in Lithuanian
matched by no *peus- in Latvian.
So Dacian and Thracian are south Baltic like Prussian and east Baltic like Lithuanian (but not like Latvian which is west Baltic like Prussian).
In LITUANUS (1992) I say that Dacians brought (as slaves) Carpathians south who became Messapians and Illyrians and from these, Albanians, and north who became Slavs. My LITUANUS (1993) article, “Slavic, a balticized Albanian”, 39:2. 78-83, also discusses linguistic relations between Baltic and Slavic.
The LITUANUS (1997) article also describes the non-Dacian Rumanians as a Carpathian people who quickly romanized linguistically to gain Roman support against their Baltic masters (the Dacians)."