They did not just swap it, did they? Svi (everything) is also related to svit (the world), which is also in Russian as svet. This is why I say Serbian made more sense to me as a native Russian speaker.
Likewise Serbian sutra, which in Russian is zavtra, same idea (in the morning, i.e. tomorrow) but with seemingly more unnecessary manipulations (considering morning is still utro in Russian).
>Likewise Serbian sutra, which in Russian is zavtra, same idea (in the morning, i.e. tomorrow) but with seemingly more unnecessary manipulations (considering morning is still utro in Russian).
I'm not sure what the argument is here. Can you elaborate?
utro = morning, sutra = in the morning, zavtra = also in the morning but weirdly distorted for no obvious reason. There seems less etymological distortion in Serbian.
That's not an opinion, that's how basic Slavic morphology/grammar works.
For example, some Russians say "v ogorode" ("in the garden"), while others say "na ogorode". We don't say "v" somehow got "distorted"/morphed into "na". Some dialects simply choose to use a different, unrelated preposition in the same context.
>No one speaks proto slavic, so it is all conjectures based on languages that were spoken more recently
Not really. Written Slavic exists since 9 century and it was spelt vs- already back then. Serbo-Croatian is an outlier here because all other Slavic languages have vs-.
Baltic languages are related to Slavic and Old Prussian had "wissa" for "all" (not "siva")
Proto-Slavic světъ => Serbian svet/svit, Russian svet.
It's two unrelated words which just happen to start with the same two consonants in Serbo-Croatian out of all Slavic languages, after the phonetical change vs- => sv-
Likewise Serbian sutra, which in Russian is zavtra, same idea (in the morning, i.e. tomorrow) but with seemingly more unnecessary manipulations (considering morning is still utro in Russian).