From: stlatos
Message: 69867
Date: 2012-06-23
>What possible reason is there to assume an unknown proto-form *bodjo- 'yellow' just so yet another unattested word could in some lng. other than Celtic give *badja- >> L? It looks like, again, you're trying to twist everything to "prove" that a word isn't Celtic, and instead of brw Celtic >> L it's Japygian/Messapic >> L. What possible theory are you trying to prove? What's the point? Do you know that *badyos > buide = yellow OI; is just as possible as *bodyos > buide = yellow OI; ?
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Bhrihskwobhloukstroy <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Bhrihskwobhloukstroy:
> > Any Ligurian etymology of Bodincus (be it from PIE *bheudh- 'bottom'
> > or *bhedh- 'dig') is indistinguishable from a Celtic one (please don't
> > reply that the first of these roots is scarcely represented in Insular
> > Celtic lexicon, because the same holds true for a great part of
> > river-names all over Celtic lands, whereas another great part of
> > river-names in the same areas does exhibit Celtic lexical material, so
> > every conclusion can be drawn: stratification of Celtic and non-Celtic
> > but also, conversely, loss of lexical items in the subsequent history
> > of Insular Celtic).
>
> I never bought into the 'fundo carens' explanation, a mere guess by the ancients, and digging is not obviously involved. I consider it more plausible that Bodincus meant 'Muddy', agreeing with "acque melmose del Po", that the same stem occurs in the Bodensee, and that Celt. *bodjo- 'yellow' originally meant 'mud-colored'; likewise Japygian or Messapic *badja- borrowed into Latin as <badius> 'chestnut-colored, bay'.
>