[tied] Re: Wuz

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Verhoft" <fa478077@...>
wrote:

> <<<By accepting Kuhn's idea that words that belong to the everyday

or lower

> semantic sphere and are attested late may belong to a substrate

language,

> because they, being part of the language of the subjugated people

are

> considered inferior.<<<
>

> <<<By assuming that *was-, *wos- was not a Germanic root but

belonged to a

> substrate that was common to the present Germanic-speaking and
> French-speaking areas, and that *wos- therefore was loaned into

French early

> enough that it was subject to the rules /o/ > /ö/, cf. Latin <coda>
> French
> <queue>.<<<
>

> That's a lot of speculation...

That's two assumptions. And I still have a lot of fingers left on
that hand ;-)

As far as the existence of a Nordwestblock language goes, I'm
convinced (and consider the alternative: then the Dutch would be
Germans ... ;-) ).


Torsten