From: george knysh
Message: 49596
Date: 2007-08-23
>carefully analyze DBG 1:1 and 2:4 it would seem that
> --- Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@...>,
> continuing a discussion between Torsten and Arnaud
> wrote:
>
> > 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.etc...
>
> *****GK: Caesar seems actually quite useful. If you
> > --- "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>____________________________________________________________________________________
> > wrote:
> > > 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".