Re: [tied] Belgians and Gauls

Hmmm,
Doubs & Deule look quite different to me but, yes, I
know that N & S France have different linguistic
histories and that Deule is probably a diminutive. BUT
maybe the difference between Gaulish & Belgic is not
P-Celt vs Q-Celt but rather akin to that between
Briton vs Pictish or English vs Scots, etc. Perhaps
the major difference is that Belgic had a Germanic
adstrate nd perhaps a different substrate. I can't
give any examples but I'd look for dichotomies like
Doubs & Deule and try to figure out if there is
anything in the nature of Gaulish and Belgic thay
could account for the difference.

--- "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
wrote:

> If I have understood the core assumption of this
> Belgian hypothesis,
> There should be two peoples + languages :
> People/language n 1 : "p-celt Gauls"
> People/language n 2 : "Belgians" (hence not
> "p-celt")
>
> And the next assumption is that these "Belgians" are
> supposed to be
> where Cesar said "Gallia Belgica" was.
> And the "p-celt Gauls" are supposed to be in the
> other area.
>
> This hypothesis makes sense if
> the "Belgians" can be identified by some criteria
> that make them different from the "p-celt Gauls"
> in phonetic or lexical data.
>
> My native hometown is Boulogne sur Mer in
> Pas-de-Calais (Departement number 62)
> this departement should be assigned to this
> "Belgian" area, according to this "Belgian" theory
> as well as neighboring departements Nord (n 59) and
> Somme (n 80)
> Professional linguists have written books trying to
> define etymologies
> for about EVERY place-name in these departements,
> that can claim to be ancient.
> Ancient means : attested since Antiquity and the
> Middle ages before year 1200.
> I have one of these books on my desk.
>
> The basic and overwhelming fact about these place
> names is very simple :
> - some have Latin origin,
> - some have Germanic origin (mainly Saxon, Norse and
> Frankish),
> - most are made up with exactly the same lexical
> roots as the rest of Gaulish place-names.
>
> Flemish names are not ancient.
> Some places have names labelled "pre-celtic" that
> are made up with some components
> like ar "river" that you can find scattered all over
> French territory
> and this "pre-celtic" layer can obviously not be
> assigned to be "belgian".
>
> Examples :
> Deule River : Dubola : the black one : same as Doubs
> River
> ialos : clearing is represented :
> Mar-euil : clearing in the marshes
> Etc
>
> Every lexical component usually labelled "Gaulish"
> has clear representatives in this area
> and contrarywise, there is no need to posit any
> extra component.
>
> The major problem is that there is absolutely
> NOTHING (Nothing at all)
> that might support the assumption that the territory
> should be cut in two or more areas.
> Basically, the place names you find in the North of
> France are made up with the same components
> as any other place where the presence of "p-celt
> Gauls" is not questioned.
> The file for anything else than LAtin, Germanic and
> GAulish is EMPTY.
>
> So the conclusions are very simple :
>
> The "Belgian" Hypothesis is USELESS,
> The assignement of so-called "GAllia BElgica" to
> some other language than standard "p-celt" GAulish
> is falsified.
>
> I don't know if place-names in the Belgique/Belgie
> country have undergone the same etymological study
> as in France,
> but as far as Northern France is concerned, there is
> not a hint of a shadow of a doubt :
> "P-celt Gauls win and take all".
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

____________________________________________________________________________________
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow