From: tgpedersen
Message: 16187
Date: 2002-10-12
>So do I.
> --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> > Given that the western Baltic languages (ie Old
> > Prussian) are
> > affiliated somehow with the Germanic languages and
> > (if you believe
> > this
> >
> > http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~histling/nytarticle.html
>
> *****GK: This is 6 years ago. I wonder if there have
> been follow ups.******
> >In at least Caesar's time, archaeologically there is the same culture
> > article) that Germanic was first influenced by
> > Balto-Slavic,
>
> *****GK: My understanding of "Balto-Slavic" is that it
> is an ancestor language of all Baltic and Slavic
> languages. So the affiliation mentioned here should
> affect not only Western Baltic tongues but everything
> else. As a matter of fact some of the linguistic
> authorities who dealt with this problem had
> hypothesized that there once existed a
> "Germano-Balto-Slavic" group, which then broke up into
> "Germanic" and "Balto-Slavic".******
>
> then by
> > Celtic, is it possible that there was once a dialect
> > continuum on the
> > South shore of the Baltic between the Baltic (Old
> > Prussian) languages
> > in (East) Prussia and the (Old) Germanic languages
> > of Denmark and
> > Sweden, a continuum that was breached by a Celtic
> > colonization of the
> > South shore (cf. Tacitus' remark that the Aestii
> > spoke a language
> > similar to that of the Britons)?
>
> *****GK: I think we should be careful in not reading
> too much into Tacitus' remark that the "Aestii" spoke
> a language like that of the Britons. This is a
> statement of the same category, it seems to me as
> Strabo's (if I remember correctly) comment that the
> Romans called the Germans "Germani" because the latter
> were "genuine Celts". The only thing I could think off
> to explain Tacitus was the possibility that some form
> of Celtic could have played the role of lingua franca
> along the Amber road as late as the 1rst c. AD.*****
> >