Re: [tied] Re: root *pVs- for cat

At 4:52:28 PM on Sunday, July 8, 2007, tgpedersen wrote:

>>> If you want to ignore the NWBlock 'issue' (other people
>>> call it a language), that is the way to go.

>> The issue in question was whether some such language had
>> anything to do with this <p> ~ <b> alternation.

> If 'some such language' means NWBlock the answer is yes,

No, it isn't: 'this <p> ~ <b> alternation' obviously refers
to the specific words under discussion, namely, the ones
that I dug up in answer to your question about the frequency
of the phenomenon.

>> In the case of the borrowings it obviously doesn't. Of
>> the words that I mentioned, at most two are relevant, and
>> quite possibly only one; observing that this is the case
>> does not require ignoring anything.

> And here 'some such language' can't mean NWBlock, since
> you are considering only the examples from Celtic, you
> supplied yourself,

Of course I am: they were the subject under discussion.

[...]

>> Note also that if in fact it really is primarily a ScGael
>> phenomenon, then the odds are very much against its having
>> anything to do with NWB influence except in some tiny
>> fraction of cases: not only should it appear already in EIr,

> Why?

Where do you think ScGael. came from? And just how recent
do you imagine that some substratal NWB influence could have
been exerted?

[...]

Brian