Re: V-, B-

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...> wrote:

>
> At 6:33:17 PM on Friday, June 20, 2008, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott"
> > <BMScott@> wrote:
>
> >> At 3:09:25 PM on Thursday, June 19, 2008, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> >>> 1)
> >>> What's the deal with B- for V- in Slavic (and neighbors')
> >>> names for
> >>> http://tinyurl.com/4ogsjh
>
> >> [...]
>
> >>> Vienna:
> >>> Bec^ (Bosnian,Croatian, Serbian)
> >>> Bech (Romani)
> >>> Bécs (Hungarian)
>
> >> These, unlike Cz. <Víden^>, clearly aren't the same name as
> >> <Wien>, so this isn't a case of <B-> for <V->. (<Wien>,
> >> <Wenia> 881, and <Víden^> appreantly go back to a Celt.
> >> <Vedunia>.)
>
> > Vindobona, actually, another *Wenet- name.
>
> One occasionally reads that,

Actually, one reads it all the time.

> but I agree with Ernst Schwarz
> that the evidence points to <Vedunia> (his *We:dunia), not
> <Vindobona>.

I'm not surprised.
So on the list, it should be Celtic *Vedunia, then?
What is the evidence Ernst Schwarz refers to?

> It makes no difference to my point, however:
> <Bec^> etc. is still clearly a different name.

Of course it does.
If it's Vindo-bona, it might be related to, say *Went-sk- > *Bec^-.
If it's Ve:dunia, it most likely isn't.

> > Wikipedia gives no source for the alleged 'Celtic' name.
>
> Perhaps you should look a bit further, then.

Why are you on Cybalist at all?
Other people would provide an answer if they knew one.
If you get nothing but snotty answers, you get tired of asking.

> [...]
>
> >>> Villach (Carinthia, S. Austria):
> >>> Be^lák (Czech)
> >>> Beljak (Slovene)
>
> It's not terribly important in this context, but Schwarz
> says that although <Beljak> is the official Slovene
> spelling, the local pronunciation is actually <Bljàk>.
>

I've always suspected that the ending PIE borrowed, and Slavic
re-borrowed, *-ák/*-áx was stressed.

> >>> Bilachium (Latin)
>
> >> Here I suspect that it's the other way around, and that
> >> German has <V-> for <B->.
>
> > Because?
>
> Because <Bilachium> (or <Bilachinium> -- there seems to be
> some question) is apparently Roman, though perhaps
> designated a slightly different place.

I was speculating that the b-/v- alternation had to do with a
substrate in the area. Do you have an idea what this German v- for b-
thing is, or is it just a one-off?


Torten