Linguistics discussion (split from new factions thread)

[Elmetiacos]

Okay, you may be able to close the gap a bit for the Greeks, but it doesn't affect the early-mid 1st millennium BC date for the Celtic sound shift and since you're saying Greek is away from the mainstream, the Celtic date should be more relevant to the rest (Ligurian, Osco-Umbrian and presumably Lusitanian) Also, remember that prior to 2000BC for the break-up of PIE is the most extreme late date possible with the late dates for Kültepe Hittite and Armenian urheimat theory and all of that. Take any other theory, or even earlier dates for Hittite, and Lusitanian has to stay weird for another 500-4000 years (leaving aside raving bonkers Palaeolithic Continuity theory)

Latin doesn't have labialisation: ΄ιππος = equus.

[cmacq]

Okay, you may be able to close the gap a bit for the Greeks, but it doesn't affect the early-mid 1st millennium BC date for the Celtic sound shift and since you're saying Greek is away from the mainstream, the Celtic date should be more relevant to the rest (Ligurian, Osco-Umbrian and presumably Lusitanian) Also, remember that prior to 2000BC for the break-up of PIE is the most extreme late date possible with the late dates for Kültepe Hittite and Armenian urheimat theory and all of that. Take any other theory, or even earlier dates for Hittite, and Lusitanian has to stay weird for another 500-4000 years (leaving aside raving bonkers Palaeolithic Continuity theory)

Latin doesn't have labialisation: ΄ιππος = equus.

Actually I had Greece not Greek, as there were many forms of the latter and but one of the former. As for Celt in the linguistic sense, I suppose that all depends on which form is being addressed. For example on Goidelic, which is indeed a form of Celt, what date would one impose for a P-shift?





CmacQ

[Elmetiacos]

Actually I had Greece not Greek, as there were many forms of the latter and but one of the former. As for Celt in the linguistic sense, I suppose that all depends on which form is being addressed. For example on Goidelic, which is indeed a form of Celt, what date would one impose for a P-shift?
CmacQ

Goidellic? Never, obviously. The kw > p shift in Gaulish is hard to tie down exactly, but must have occurred some time between the break up of proto-Celtic in the Hallstatt era and the appearance of inscriptions such as the "Latumaros" Vase (c.200BC?) which definitely show the process complete. Goidellic kept the sound long intact (so the Ogams have MAQ, modern Irish & Scots Gaelic mac) while Celtiberian simplified it to a k.

[cmacq]

Goidellic? Never, obviously. The kw > p shift in Gaulish is hard to tie down exactly, but must have occurred some time between the break up of proto-Celtic in the Hallstatt era and the appearance of inscriptions such as the "Latumaros" Vase (c.200BC?) which definitely show the process complete. Goidellic kept the sound long intact (so the Ogams have MAQ, modern Irish & Scots Gaelic mac) while Celtiberian simplified it to a k.

So carefully now, based on the time frame and setting you provided before, for the P-shift, your actually saying that Goidellic is proto-Celt?


CmacQ

[Elmetiacos]

So carefully now, based on the time frame and setting you provided before, for the P-shift, your actually saying that Goidellic is proto-Celt?

CmacQ

No. I'm saying that the change from kw to p must date from after Celtic was introduced into Ireland, because that particular change never happened in Ireland. Since that's usually dated to between 700 and 500BC, and proto-Celtic ceasing to be spoken as a single language between ~1200 and 800BC.

The point is the very large gap in time between the centum/satem split, with the latter merging the k'w and kw sounds, and the full labialisation in Celtic, Greek and Italic. It would be very strange for Lusitanian to be undergoing labialisation (an early 1st millenium BC phenomenon for everyone else) before it had differentiated kw and k'w which is something reckoned to have happened before - probably well before - 2000BC. It therefore looks as if Iccona could not derive from PIE *ek'wo- and isn't Epona.

[cmacq]

No. I'm saying that the change from kw to p must date from after Celtic was introduced into Ireland.

So by Celts in Ireland, you of course mean the Menapii? Or is that the Herpeditani???




CmacQ

[Elmetiacos]

So by Celts in Ireland, you of course mean the Menapii? Or is that the Herpeditani???

CmacQ

Huh? I haven't even heard of the last one.

[Subotan]

Despite the fact that I am only able to understand 1/10th of this thread, I liek it very much.

[KingOfTheIsles]

Fascinating. I add:

war>crīgā(gave german 'krieg' and danish 'krig')
(gave -possibly- 'cri' and 'crier', French "shout", noun and verb)
fight>skermō(gave the word 'skirmish')
die>dhewə (gave Deyja(old norse))
(and this word Deyja -possibly- gave 'déjà', French "already")
kill>colḗjō (nothing to explain here)
(gave -possibly- colère, French "anger")
destroy>dheukō (here neither...)
(gave -possibly- dragon, if you pronounce the "h" like in German)

Are you claiming these etymologies to be true, or is this just conjecture? Several are almost certainly completely false, and the rest seem dubious.

For example on Goidelic, which is indeed a form of Celt, what date would one impose for a P-shift?

I don't get this question. Seeing as Irish is Q-Celtic, the proto-celtic labiovelar became a plain velar sound, rather than a labial sound, as in Gaulish and Brythonic. So there was never a P-shift in Goidelic.

Linear B Greek has the Kw sound intact, in Ancient Greek it's become P.

This, presumably, accounts for the difference between the Ancient Greek hippos and the Latin equus? It is interesting that the labiovelar stop>labial stop shift seemingly occurred in what appeared to be separate IE families. I had always believed this to be unique to P-Celtic, but after a little research it also appears to have happened in Oscan as well as Greek.

As a side note, how exactly do you reconstruct the syntax and morphology of proto-gemanic? (I assume that this is what is used for the Sweboz) Is it just a case of making educated guesses based on the current syntax in Germanic languages? Was there even a fixed word order? (SOV would have been my guess)

[Elmetiacos]

This, presumably, accounts for the difference between the Ancient Greek hippos and the Latin equus? It is interesting that the labiovelar stop>labial stop shift seemingly occurred in what appeared to be separate IE families. I had always believed this to be unique to P-Celtic, but after a little research it also appears to have happened in Oscan as well as Greek.

As a side note, how exactly do you reconstruct the syntax and morphology of proto-gemanic? (I assume that this is what is used for the Sweboz) Is it just a case of making educated guesses based on the current syntax in Germanic languages? Was there even a fixed word order? (SOV would have been my guess)

Latin equus is indeed cognate with Greek hippos, both from PIE *H1ek'wo-. There are, as you say, what might be called P and Q Italic (although some people would kick Latin and its closest relative, Faliscan, out of the Italic family) Ligurian is another dead language that seems to have had the kw > p shift and some Lusitanian words like praisom, praesondo and pumpi are good candidates to be derived from PIE kw- initials, suggesting it had done the same - unlike its Celtiberian neighbour.

You'll have to talk to Blitzkrieg80 about the Germanic stuff.