Taranis
Elite member
If you have read it, and the works of Koch & Wodtko (Palaeohispanica, 2010), C. J. Untermann (Verba, 2009) and others in this same way, and you are not agree...then you can follow with yours obsoletes teories...I think that you have Villar/Prosper overdose.
Funny how you consistently ignore the actual arguments of my so-called "obsolete theory" while they still remain valid, and make a permanent call to authority of other people without providing me any different evidence.
ps > ks > ss > s, is an innovation in all celtic areas of Hispania. That is known.
This is not true. I have provided you examples that yields ps -> xs in Celtiberian, which is as I said an innovation of Proto-Celtic.
MMM...how can you explain gaulish god name APADEVA or the gaulish tribes PICTONES, PLEUXII?. Evidently, the p loss was not in protoceltic...
In the P-Celtic languages, *kw is rendered as *p. It's claear that Gaulish "Apa-" is derived from Proto-Celtic "Akwa-". If the loss was not Proto-Celtic, how do you explain Celtiberian "Arevaci", Irish "Athair", Gaulish "Orcos" or Welsh 'Llan'?