Re: [tied] Lusitanians

One would have to show first that any of those features existed in Lusitanian (or in any other substrate, for that matter).

Piotr

----- Original Message -----
From: <dmilt1896@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 3:37 AM
Subject: Re:Re: [tied] Lusitanians


--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, João Simões Lopes Filho
<jodan99@...> wrote:
> Some of the traits of Lusitanian could have influenced Portuguese?
> Examples of some curious traits in Portuguese development from
Latin:
> 1) -l- > zero cf. pala(m) > pá "shovel"; mala(m),malu(m) > má,
mau "bad"
> 2) -n- > nasalization or zero, cf. leone(m) > lea~o; linu(m) >
linho;
> vena(m) > veia
> 3) transformation of all L-clusters. (cl, pl, etc) into palatals or
> R-clusters.
> 4) nasal diphthongs: a~o /a~w/; o~e /o~y/; a~e /a~y/
>
> Joao SL

Lusitanian was a language of southwest Iberia. See map at
http://iiasnt.leidenuniv.nl/pie/ielangs/lusitanian.html
As I understand it, Portuguese developed in northwest Iberia and
moved south with the reconquest. Wouldn't that make Lusitanian an
unlikely substrate? I suppose you could suggest Portuguese might
have started in the south, been pushed north and then returned, but
as far as I know there is no attestation of Portuguese before the
12th century.
Dan