Re: Celtic/Germanic

--- In cybalist@..., "Christopher Gwinn" <sonno3@...> wrote:

>
> > From the little I know of Celtic languages, with respect

to "style"

> > they fit the stereotypical description of things Celtic:
> Extravagant,
> > when not downright suppletive then extremely complicated

paradigms,

> a
> > typical elite language, that it would take a lifetime to learn
> > properly
>
> Come on - nearly every IE language takes a considerable amount of
> time to learn properly, with even some native speakers never truly
> mastering the language in their lifetimes (usually based on their
> education level). Celtic languages are certainly no more harder

than

> Russian or Czech,

As far as I'm concerned, Russian and Czech *are* harder to learn than
some other languages I know.

>and I really don't know how you can call Celtic
> langauges typically "elite". I think your admitted lack of

knowledge

> of Celtic linguistics forces you to see more complexity in them

than

> they actually possess.

True. I got it all from reading Holger Pedersen.

>
> > (and I am pretty sure a good deal of the decade-long
> > education of druids included Pan.nini-like rules learnt by

heart),

> > the kind of language students flee from at school, if they have

any

> > other interest than language for language's sake. And also
> > diversified - each Celtic tribe would have a linguistic axe to
> grind
> > with the neighbor tribe.
>
> <chuckling> What would possibly make you think that? What evidence

do

> you have of this? Do you have a linguistic axe to grind with YOUR
> nighbors?
>
> > Compare that to early Germanic which
> > compared to some rival IE languages looks like a simplified trade
> > language - a creole.
>
> What makes you think this? I certainly see nothing that looks like
>a
> creole in Germanic - as we have already discussed, the allged 30%
> substrate in Germanic is probably bogus. Just because there was a
> sound shift, doesn't mean that Germanic was a creole - similar

sound

> shifts occured in quite a few of the IE branches.

The question of substrate does not enter into it, nor does the Grimm
shift. What I mean is that verb inflectionm, with the new weak
paradigm, is simpler than that of most other IE languages. The weak
paradigm uses an auxilliary verb (later incorporated) instead of
inflection, which is a typical creole thing to do.

> > The result is that if Celtic tribes are
> > displaced and in contact with as yet unknown to them other Celtic
> > tribes, they will try Germanic, much as Europeans today will use
> > English on vacation, no matter where.
>
> I am struggling to understand you here. You are saying that if a
> Celtic tribe moves into a new area and comes into contact with
> another Celtic tribe - but one that they don't know is Celtic yet -
> they are going to try speaking to them in Germanic? This would be
> truly bizarre - I hope I am misunderstanding you. Anyway - don't

you

> think someone would catch in within like...5 minutes that the

person

> they were talking to really spoke the same language as him/herself?

Young Swedes and Danes today are speaking English on first contact.
Being interested in the neighbors' language is not considered cool.
So there's a counter-example.

> > If this were the case, it would be difficult for Roman writers to
> > distinguish which tribe was Celtic and which Germanic, and so it
> > was.
>
> - Chris Gwinn

Torsten