Grizzly
Regular Member
- Messages
- 199
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 0
One thing I don't understand about your criticisms, Grizzly, is how you mean to explain away the Celtiberian language as being Q-Celtic. If the Celts in Iberia were a minority from Gaul, wouldn't we expect P-Celtic to be spoken among them? Why the large difference?
Where do you see that this feature comes from the Celts ? It can be a influence of the pre-Celtic substratum.
Just an example : most of the French words with a latin root have come from Italy (the Romans to make it simple). Those words which begin by the sound "k" ("c" written -see castrum, canis), will keep this sound in the Italian and southern French dialects (see castello in Italian, castel in Southern France...). In Central and Northern France, they begin by the sound "sh" (ch written - see château, chien). In northern France, they begin again with the sound ("k" written "c" or "qu"- see cateau, quin). What does it mean ? That the Romance language from northern France comes directly from Italy without passing by Parisian region ? That Northern French is more archaic than Parisian French ? No, it is just an internal evolution. Either the substrate, either anything else, we will never know.
Apparently, you defend the autochtonous theory. If it is the case, you will have to explain fare more things (why did they spread only toward the north, the insignifiance of the Celtic heritage in Spain - chariots, oppida...) etc...
I don't say that I have all the answers. But I try to be consistent.
Your examples about Scandinavian language in Normandy also seems a bad refutation in light of this. Usually, a ruling class will use the same language as where they came from, but to establish a distinct language takes a long time of being the dominant culture in an area.
Using Q instead of P is not a "different language", but a different feature.