Re: Przeworsk as the genesis of Germanic (Was:Paleo-Germanic lexical

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:

>
>
> --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> > > The standard view (Jastorf= Germanic) would
> > > view this as an extension rather than a creation
> > of
> > > Germanic. How does your theory ... work?****
> >
> > From a linguist point of view the deepest horizon we
> > can reach in
> > Germanic itself would be the invasions after the
> > Tungri/Thuringi;
> > Germanic breaks up at that time. If we want to go
> > further back we must
> > look at sets of loanwirds as far as I can see.
>
> ****GK: No, what I meant is this: if you think
> Przeworsk is where Germanic was born, how do you
> explain its further extension? For instance: how did
> the Goths become Germanic? They developed quite
> independently of Przeworsk.****

I've been wondering about the Goths and Wielbark culture. But if
Wikipedia is to be trusted, it replaced the Oksywie culture in the
first century CE (I've seen 30 CE somewhere). That means they left
Scandinavia *after* the Germanic-speaking invasion, thus with Geranic
speakers among them. As for the name, note the g-/y- confusion in a
parallel; I think Goth and Jute are cognate substrate words; Jutland
was earlier Reidgotaland, and that it was some general term for
original inhabitants.


Torsten