Re: Volcae and Volsci

From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 56138
Date: 2008-03-28

----- Original Message -----
From: tgpedersen

Then I might have something tentative here wrt your request that I
"factor up" PGermanic according to the various ethnic/cultural groups
which were components in its genesis in Przeworsk (as I see it):
The language of geminates, with cognates spread over Celtic, Germanic,
Balto-Slavic, Baltic Finnic and partially Italic

This language of geminates does not exist.
Your repeated statements that it's not even PIE
are unsupported.
It's just Celtic
(or less probably osco-umbrian of course)

I consider that dhu?-p is better
and the existence of dhumb and stu?p
are an obvious proof that this is PIE.
*dhu?p a Germanic root of PIE origin.
This root follows the standard PIE affixation.
Infix -n- and prefix -s-

Germanic *hanti is a LW from Uralic *kom-t-(i)
There is no geminate at all here.


I suspect is the language of the Corded Ware culture. I can't see
which other culture would span the area of those substrate loans. Of
course the *kat- etc root, which its cognates outside of that area is
likely to be a loan, some kind of sea-born connection to some Semitic
This is multi-layered fancy.
Nothing supports this castle of cards.

As you can see, I suspect the Chatti, because of the name
to have some connection to that substrate language; note the -tt- in
the name, impossible for Celtic, Germanic and Italic, in which PIE
*-tt- > -ss- (and in the other IE families > *-st-).
Celtic and Osco-umbrian are full of geminates
resulting from phonotactical -?-C > -CC-
and most H2-C > CC as well.

Why is the word Chatti- impossible in Celtic ?
This is again unsupported.

Its having -tt- is on the contrary a direct proof
it can only be Celtic
(or Osco-Umbrian less probably)