[tied] Re: Latin is a q-Dialect having p- from kW , PIE is similar

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@>
> wrote:
>
> > 1. the delabialization kW/u > ku happened AFTER p..kW >

kW...kW

> > Why? Because otherwise we need to see at least in one language

p/qu

> > alternances for the same root: that is not the case.
> >
> > So Based ON WHAT YOU SUSTAIN that the delabialisation

preceeded

> > the p..KW > kW..kW?
> >
> > => so based on this timeframe:
> > 1. p..kW > kW..kW
> > 2. kW/u > ku
>
> I agree that this is the order for Latin, not for Celtic.
>

Thanks to agree (at least for Latin :)), because Piotr didn't: and
I cannot see why...

But please look: here is all the clue : I agree with you that kW/u

> ku is not quite PIE, but for sure is very old and there are traces

of it in many PIE languages : so you cannot say that this is only for
Latin because such a transformation belongs to 'PIE-dialectal-time'

Now If 2. kW/u > ku belongs to Dialectal-PIE-Times
then
1. p..kW > kW..kW that 'in any logic' should happened before it,
belongs to the Dialectal-PIE-Times too...

If so, we cannot talk separately about 1 and 2 in relation with the
Celtic or Latin (as Watkins (that detected the real issue here)
considered)

And if 1) or 2) should be common or not-applicable and we have
Celtic perkunia: some drastical conclusion for Celtic p...kW >
kW...kW will appear : this suppose transformation is not applicable
for Celtic

> > > based on
> > > *perkunyo where we have a Gothic loan starting with f-

indicated for

> > > sure an initial p-
>
> > Is what I said initially : the loan happened when Celtic has an
> > initial p- and the German still have the p ...(so aprox. before

1000

> > BC)
>
> Since Armenian seems to treat p the same as Celtic (p>f>xW>h) it
> would have to be much longer ago.

You are right. I said 'before 1000 BC', only to placed it outside any
historical times, but I agree that is much older...

> I don't believe firgen is a loanword.
>
> > Native?
> >
> > *perkW- > *perku:-
> > and
> > *penkWe > *pempe
> >
> > seems ok for you?
>
> There's no certain evidence that the Germanic KW>P changes are
> regular or that they have anything to do with other KW/P sounds in

the

> word.
>

kW > p changes are not regular for Germanic , I agree: I
said 'Germanic p-forms are inherited from some PIE dialectal p-
forms' : however for the 'same context': p...kW is delicate to
consider something else...as Piotr did.

For this reason I said, firgen is a loanword from a Proto-Celtic
*perkW-unya:

(and I'm not the first that said this, today, this is the 'usual'
opinion)

Marius