Celtic and Pre-Germanic

[Kentel]

For information, and since it matches quite well the topic of this thread, I just happen to have published a paper titled "Early Linguistic Contacts between Celtic and Germanic" and it's in this book (I'm not interested in the sales). If you want to have a look at it, just send me a pm .

 

[LeBrok]

For information, and since it matches quite well the topic of this thread, I just happen to have published a paper titled "Early Linguistic Contacts between Celtic and Germanic" and it's in this book (I'm not interested in the sales). If you want to have a look at it, just send me a pm .

Congrats Kentel!

 

[MOESAN]

There's no possible doubt here : Le Gonidec's "french r" is uvular, a fortiori during the XIXth century when his book was written; it's supposed to become uvular during the XVIIth century, hence there's no doubt what he's talking about. By the way, it's qualified "french" as opposed to "provençal R".

Moreover, and as I previously wrote, a change of articulation from an alveolar to an uvular is articulatory an unseen phenomenon : the two places of articulation are too remote from each other, and the myth about a population eager to imitate a germanic aristocracy is merely contradicted by the dating of this alleged sound change (during the 17th century the French kings & their mates did not speak germanic, as far as I know).



You're right, it's very close, but you can notice that in some regions of France, especially south of the Loire where the occitan dialects were in use, the old people are still reluctant to use the uvular "french" R. Why is it not the case in Brittany ?

Another relevant point : in Gaelic there is both the uvular R (gh) and the [x] sound (ch), which attests that we do have a minimal pair in Celtic.

As for your point regarding how Breton people write their language, I would stress that many old Breton speakers do not know how to write their own language (and don't care to). But the case is obvious : Le Gonidec hears a "french R", and the french R is an uvular trill. Plus it fits the witnesses I heard in my country (ar vro vigoudenn, evel ma ouzoc'h).

Noz vat deoc'h ivez

A) "french R" according to Le Gonidec:
Le Gonidec (1775/1838) made his work roughly between 1800/1830: at this time the most common french 'R' (occitan or not, spite what you say about North South opposition, some occitan today regions have too the parisian uvular R) was not uvular R but a thrilled one (I have no proofs for the entire territory of France: what is sure is that the Bourgogne R was yet a thrilled one no long time ago - BUT MAYBE ARE YOU RIGHT HERE: maybe Le Gonidec did reference to the high standard classes french R... What is not saying that this uvular R was dominent in Low-Brittany at his time: maybe he found it more "correct" - but I believe gallo romance of E-Brittany at that time was thrilled, and by experience I know that Leon breton R (NW brittany) was still a thrilled R among the majority of locutors during the last century - so, 50/50 here for the Gonidec's opinion (not for the popular usage!)
for me uvular R developped slowly in France, from a center I see around Île-de-France and maybe Picardie, after Franks occupation - the ways of spread were the big rivers en big towns (Loire by example) which were around these rivers - in the most of France uvular R is not a basic people one -

B) your argument about date of generalization of uvular R in France does not make any point: I said the origin of uvular R in France is surely very older than its generalization (as for the 'J' /X/ sound of castillan, that was not pronounced by the gentry before the XVI° century but surely was very older around Burgos and surrounding regions - the today OA /wa/ of french was not pronounced by the french nobles (they said OE) until recently but the OA pronounciation existed yet in N/N-E corners of France - so gentry and basic folks can know different dates of evolution for language -

 

[MOESAN]

Moreover, and as I previously wrote, a change of articulation from an alveolar to an uvular is articulatory an unseen phenomenon : the two places of articulation are too remote from each other, and the myth about a population eager to imitate a germanic aristocracy is merely contradicted by the dating of this alleged sound change (during the 17th century the French kings & their mates did not speak germanic, as far as I know).




Another relevant point : in Gaelic there is both the uvular R (gh) and the [x] sound (ch), which attests that we do have a minimal pair in Celtic.

As for your point regarding how Breton people write their language, I would stress that many old Breton speakers do not know how to write their own language (and don't care to). But the case is obvious : Le Gonidec hears a "french R", and the french R is an uvular trill. Plus it fits the witnesses I heard in my country (ar vro vigoudenn, evel ma ouzoc'h).

Noz vat deoc'h ivez

C) thrilled /r/ to uvular /R/(proxi) is not a short way evolution but I proposed (it was just an hypothesis) a previous germanic 'hr' sound - look at some flemish 'R' today, different from the dutch ones, closer to a guttural /R/ in place of /r/ -
all the way, some surprising evolutions can occur concerning consonnants, but then, it is true, they need long time - a lot of consonnants passed through the stage of /H/ or /h/ before fading out, why not a /r/ even if I prefer my first hyspothesis (the local germanic one) - all the way, I 'm not attached too much to it, just a play -
I like your humor about germanic speaking nobility of France in the XVII°C. !!! no need !!!
D) breton not written: true for basic folks, untrue for educated ones -
the problem is phonologic and the confusion of /gh/ and uvular /R/ is only very recent in some breton dialects - in the other, the huge majority and in ancient times, the only confusions you found were /r/>< /l/ and in some dialects the evolution:
/d >> z >> r/ -
concerning minimal pairs, at that time: gh /H/ >< ch /X/ # r /R/ or /r/ -

apart from this problem, you can hear in native colloquial breton of Vannetais (and few places of cornouaillais) a /X/ at beginning of words in place of 'r-' when the speakers adopted the french /R/, but also you can hear /rh/ by the ones who kept (today yet) the thrilled /r/ (think to welsh) !

kenavo ar c'hentañ lenn, ha trugarez da argusenniñ un tamm: e-mod-se e vez lakaet an traoù da voud splannoc'h

 

[MOESAN]

to get back to the thread I think now that proto-germanic was no so close to proto-celtic, and that the basis was rather the NW archaïc I-E (akin enough to proto-italic, and spoken maybe already at Funnelbeaker times) and a proto-satem languages (I think in the Corded Ware people) - a bet again and always!!! the ancient enough stage of this NW I-E could explain a lot of similarities, even with celtic, but I think the speakers of proto-celtic were more isolated in N-Alps at these time (what could explain this odd and uncommon lost of *P-, unique phenomenon in wtestern I-E Europe) - ancestors of Italics seem having stayed longer time in central Europe, in contact woth northwestern populationsa and pro-o-baltic speakers according to recent linguistic thesis...

 

[Kentel]

Congrats Kentel!

Thanks LeBrok ! I find the discussions here very challenging and inspiring

 

[Kentel]

kenavo ar c'hentañ lenn, ha trugarez da argusenniñ un tamm: e-mod-se e vez lakaet an traoù da voud splannoc'h

Give me a few weeks, I'll need to read more books in order to find new references to rebute yours ! Trugarez mad d'ar gaozeadenn zedennus; kalz traoù a zeskan ganeoc'h