RE : [tied] Re: North of the Somme

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:

>
>
> --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister
> > <gabaroo6958@> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Given that W Germanic invaded Celtic-speaking
> territory and N Germanic didn't,

Nope. Wrong. Only the area which is the native area of High German,
the dialects with the second sound shift, south of a line approx. from
the Ruhr industrial area to Hannover to Berlin was populated with
Celts. North of it it was another or several other people(s).

> one would guess that
> at least some of the differences are due to Celtic
> substrate, possibly the palatal derived affricates of
> English et al and the sound changes of High German

Falls on the wrong premise.

> Given that these changes are different
> THIS may be a way of showing differences between
> Gaulish and Belgic, i.e. if you see Gaulish (or
> whatever you call the Celtic language of the Boii,
> Helvetii and other S German, Swiss, Austrian and
> Bohemian Celts) as a substrate of High German
> and Belgic as a subtrate of English and Dutch

*and* of Low German, spoken north of said line.

> BUT I'll let you guys fight it out
>
>
> > Which Celtic substrate are you referring to?
> >
> >
> > --BUT correct me
> > > What timeframe are we looking at?
> > > c. 600 BC for E Germanic?
> > > c. 200 BC for N Germanic?
> > > c. 400 AD for split-up of W Germanic languages?
> >
> It seems too short a time for Scandinavian to have
> diverged that much --remember what you said about the
> big gap between N and W?

It is generally recognized that Runic is close to Proto-Germanic.
Runic is sometimes referred to as a koine, ie. a common upper class
languager. If so, the differences are due to the substrate.

> Also remember that Germanic was in contact with Celtic
> and, before that, Italic for quite a while.

Or some ancestor of it.

> So I'd guess c. 2000 BC somewhere in Upper Saxony,
> Silesia, maybe Slovakia and possibly up to the Baltic,
> if one postulates that Baltic was following from the
> East, and Celtic & Italic to the S and SE
> Then 1000-500 BC N Germany

You really want to place Germanic in Germania, don't you?
I'd better upload some more maps.

> > How about
> > c. 50 BCE Future Northwest Germanic speakers move
> > west from Southern
> > Poland, Future East Germanic speakers move south.
> > c. 0 Future North Germanic speakers move from the
> > area around Hamburg
> > into Denmark, then Scandinavia, future West Germanic
> > speakers stay and
> > move west.

Torsten