Re: Grimm shift as starting point of "Germanic"

****GK: Yes. I can see where you're coming from. And I
don't disagree with any of it. But my point was a
little different. The Germanic language family as
presently constituted, and as historically attested
from at least ca. the time of Caesar if not slightly
earlier, must have possessed a certain number of
"unique characteristics" in order to be considered
something sui generis. It was not Celtic, it was not
Latin, it was not Greek etc.. And it was sui generis
no matter what the relationship of its structures
(lexical, syntactic, morphological etc..) was to PIE.
George.
==========
We can rely on areal features.
European PIE has a clear a e i o u system.
As exhibited by CEltic, LAtin, Greek, etc,
Germanic does not have this system
A.
=============

I understood you to imply that we had no clear way of
establishing a timeline for the emergencce of any of
these structures (incl. Grimm, the most "defining"
one).So let's try a bit of retroactive logic.
We can assume, can we not, that by the time Caesar
spoke of the Germani, enough of these characteristics
existed to justify his belief as to the
distinctiveness of the Germanic language(s). We could
probably agree that the Grimm shift had largely if not
completely occurred by then.
Let us turn our attention to the Bastarnae.
According to Tacitus, they were a Germanic-speaking
people. Torsten's "para-Germanic" hypothesis has no
basis outside of his imagination. If we have to choose
between Torsten and Tacitus it is clear who is the
better witness.
Tacitus did not think they were as "Germanic" as to
appearance (though largely so as to general culture)
by comparison to the Germans of Germania west of the
Visla.But there can be no doubt as to their language.
His witness is absolutely decisive on this. This is
where we have to start.
Archaeologically and historically the Bastarnae were
rather special. Except for the very beginning of their
existence in their Moldavian and nearby haunts (when
they demonstrate 'jastorfian' arch.traits) their
material culture was their own (shared with
non-Germanic locals such as the Daco-Getans) and bore
little similarity to the material culture of even
their nearest Germanic neighbours the Przeworsk
Vandals/Lugians. But that obviously did not stop them
from being Germanic-speaking. This bears repeating
again and again. As far as Tacitus was concerned the
Bastarnae of 98 CE were as "Germanic-speaking" as the
Vandals, the Goths, and any other of the Germanic
populations he mentioned. Given the known fact (stated
by Gibbon and mentioned by Torsten) that the
historical associations of the Bastarnae were
practically always with non-Germanic populations,the
question arises: just when did they become "Germanic"?
When did they acquire the Germanic speech they
undoubtedly spoke? There is nothing to suggest that
this is some later development due to later contacts
with indubitable Germanic populations since such
contacts are not recorded. The obvious conclusion is
that the Bastarnae who settled in Moldavia and
surrounding areas ca. 200 BCE (or a little earlier if
the Sciri were a component)were already
Germanic-speaking when they arrived.
George
============
Where did they arrive from ??
Arnaud
============


We have three "leader names" from the 2nd c.BCE.
Torsten, following Gibbon, does not think they are
Germanic. But Gibbon's text is at least partially
defective. Muellenhoff, a much stronger scientific
authority than Gibbon, thinks they are indeed
Germanic. And I see no reason to doubt this.
Muellenhoff believes that 1."Clondicus" resembles
O.Sax. "Indico", that 2."Cotto" resembles Old Sax.
"Goddo", and 3."Talto" has Alemannic analogues.
Since the Bastarnae can be archaeologically traced to
the area of Western Pomerania and of the Jastorf
culture generally, we conclude that the language they
brought with them to Moldavia was also spoken at that
time in the area whence they came.
There was no Przeworsk culture prior to contacts of
Jastorfians and late Lusatians,and there was no
Przeworsk culture in the Bastarnian areas. Since the
Bastarnae were undoubtedly Germanic-speaking,there is
no way this can be due to expansion of Przeworsk.
As to Grimm, take your choice. The prevailing view is
that the shift occurred sometime in the first
millennium BCE. If one can be "Germanic" before the
shift, then its dating becomes irrelevant. IF NOT,
then we must accept that it occurred prior to the
Bastarnian out-migration from the southern Baltic, and
prior to the constitution of the Goths in their
historic Swedish and Polish locations.In neither case
is it associated with the spread of Przeworsk.****
=============
There is no place for them in Southern Baltic.
This place is already overcrowded
with Celtic, Baltic and Finno-Sabme speakers.
Arnaud
==================