Re: Odp: Nordwestblock

From: Mark Odegard
Message: 1956
Date: 2000-03-30

I have no quarrel with your comment on dating Grimm's law. What bothers me some is that we are not permitted to call it Germanic until the first sound shift; this is variously dated, but 500 BCE seems to be the consensus. What did they speak before then? Certainly not PIE. Considering that proto-Slavic is dated before this, there are moments when you think the literature is saying Germanic is the youngest of the daughter branches.
 
At the moment, my thinking is that Germanic at one point was very very small, and well off by itself. Alternatively, it was part of a larger supergrouping of which only it survives. This theoretical supergrouping might include the Northwest Bloc, or it might not.  One of the historic peculiarities of Germanic is that the various dialects (excepting Gothic, but to include what became North Germanic) 'contaminated' each other for a long period, extending well down into historic times.
 
One thought is that the Romans, by their activities in Gaul and later in Austria/Hungary, created a very real power vacuum in Northern Europe, one filled by ambitious Germanic war-chiefs. By the time of the Roman Empire, the Veneti seem to have disappeared, while the continental Celts are docilated and turned into Romans.
 
--Mark.
From: Piotr Gasiorowski
To: Mark Odegard
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 10:09 AM
Subject: Odp: [cybalist] Odp: Nordwestblock

 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 5:22 AM
Subject: Re: [cybalist] Odp: Nordwestblock

Mark,
 
Grimm's Law can't be dated too late. You must aloow some time for Verner's Law to follow it, THEN the shift of stress to the initial syllable, and THEN the geographical dispersal of the Germani (or at least all the Germanic groups whose languages are documented). If Grimm's Law, as often thought, was set in operation by substrate influence, it must be a very old change (going back to the time when the Pre-Proto-Germani got in touch with the non-IE substrate of the would-be Germanic homeland, and in any event it's likely to have preceded the oldest written Germanic languages by several centuries.
 
Piotr
 
 
 
Who knows if the Teutons who joined the Cimbri in their southward raid in the late 2nd century BC weren't NWB-speakers rather than Germani proper. The unshifted stops of Teut- might suggest that (the usual story is that the name is of Celtic origin). Just a loose thought, don't take it too seriously.
 
Piotr
 
Mark here.
 
I don't take it too seriously either, but admit to liking it. Oh, the stuff I read, and don't remember where I read it .... but: there seem to be some who argue for a later date for the 1st Germanic sound-shift, or at least, say it did not become complete until sometime past AD 1.