Re: Non-Indo-European in Germanic

Toresten, it's interesting you seem to suggest that Germanic speakers
came from further south before migrating north into Scandinavia,
whereas I always thought that Germanic speakers started from the
north and gradually expanding southwards and westwards, leading to
the migratory pressure on Celtic speakers that was menifest in Julius
Caesar's campaigns.

-Michael

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "studey22" <lookwhoscross-
> eyednow@...> wrote:
> > Torsten, what is your opinion as to the origin of the 28% non-
Indo-
> > European in Germanic? What would a more plausible theory than
the
> > Nordwestblock be? And if the Nordwestblock area is not non-Indo-
> > European, then what else can it be shown to be? Can it be shown
> that
> > it was more likely to have been Germanic or Celtic? In Times
> > Historical Atlas the Nordwestblock was suggested to be Indo-
> European
> > but not Celtic or Germanic.
> >
>
> The homeland of the 28% language (or one part of it, there might be
> several languages hiding in the 28%) should fulfill two criteria:
>
> 1) It should be located in an area that was colonised by the
> Swebians/early Germani/Thuringians/Hermunduri before any expansion
to
> the west (Nordwestblock) or the north (Denmark, Sweden).
>
> 2) Since the words <ship> and <sea> are part of that language, its
> homeland should be near the sea.
>
> Solution: Lower Elbe, around Hamburg. According to Kuhn, the
> Nordwestblock area was Germanified, as it were, in a pincer
movement,
> one Germanic branch spreading along the German North Sea coast (and
> another moving into the Rhineland). It is noteworthy that an inland
> people like the Hermunduri take to the sea that fast. Perhaps their
> first "converts" on the lower Elbe helped them with maritime
> technology.
>
> Torsten