Re: [tied] Belgians and Gauls

----- Original Message -----

From: george knysh

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 7:45 PM

Subject: Re: [tied] Belgians and Gauls

--- Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@ yahoo.com>,
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 q

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@ wanadoo.fr>
> 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=monopoly herenow
>
>

____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
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=monopoly herenow