From: tgpedersen
Message: 49579
Date: 2007-08-21
>Come to think of it, if this name pattern distribution is
> In general,
> in the northern part of France,
> from the Loire River Northward, (to the Rhine)
> that is to say, the place where P-celt Gauls are massively attested
> (Let us put aside this "Belgian" affair for a while)
>
> you often find the name of tribes under three forms :
>
> Nominative plural : tribe's name
> Accusative singular neuter : province's name
> Ablative-locative plural : capital's name
>
> Example : Pictav-i (tribe)
> Province : pictav-u > Poitou (territory possessed by the Pictavi)
> Capital : pictav-is > Poitiers (at the Pictavi's city/market)
>
> Most modern province capitals end with -s (coming down from
> ablative-locative plural) while the province often ends with a
> vowel. (from the accusative neuter)
> Bourges versus Berry, Angers versus Anjou (etc)
>
> It is not possible to make out if this traces back to Gaulish or
> LAtin because case markers are about the same in the two languages.
> In many cases, the Roman name has been replaced by the tribe's name.
> This is why I would consider probable that this traces back to
> Gaulish :
> it tends to erase Latin influence and show the fairly strong
> survival potential of GAulish
> under Roman occupation.
>
> In some cases, in compound names, you found genitive plural :
> in that case, the tribe's name and the defined name are separated by
> -or- or -eur- (from -orum)
> this is a rare case.
> Some examples have been created when Germanic tribes began invaded
> the country so this proves a full declension system with many cases
> must have survived after the Roman Empire collapsed.
>
> I don't know who first noticed this tribe + province + capital
> structure
> It is quite commonplace knowledge.
>
> Reims with -s also fits in the mould.
> And Paris as well.
>
> As we say in French, I don't want to "make the knife spin inside the
> wound"
> Dear Torsten,
> this is one more heavy blow on this "non Celtic Belgian" hypothesis.