Re: V-, B-

--- On Sat, 11/8/08, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

> From: tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...>
> Subject: [tied] Re: V-, B-
> To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, November 8, 2008, 5:48 AM
> > (Indeed, Venetic treatment of voiced aspirates is so
> similar
> > to that of Latin, which is peculiar within Italic,
> that I am tempted
> > to posit a Venetic substrate for Latin. This is
> supported by the
> > names <Praeneste> and <Venetulani> (Plin.)
> as well as the use
> > of 'free ones' in the sense 'children'
> (Lat. <li:beri:>, Ven. dat.
> > pl. <louderobos>). But I digress.)
>
> Damn, you beat me to it. Henceforth I will refer to Latin
> 'mots
> populaires' with root /a/ as belonging to 'the
> (Latin) a-language'
> (which I assume, ie. accept as a working hypothesis, is
> Venetic).
>
>
> Torsten

In some previous posts (years ago), some have posited that Lusitanian was related to Q-Italic, with Ligurian and Sikeli lumped. If you're seeing such close relationship between Latin and Venetic, et al. Then perhaps Italic unity is a mirage rooted in adstrates. This might also explain the locations of Q-Italic at the margins of Italy: Sicily, Ligurian, the mouth of the Tiber, the N. end of the Adriatic.