Re: Ligurian

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Bhrihskwobhloukstroy <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@> wrote:
>
> > DGK:
> > > You are now free to argue
> > > that Barzio and Barziago can be Celtic in origin from the same set.-root,
> > > but OIr <bairt> no longer provides compelling evidence for a Celtic
> > > /o:/-grade in the Barg- place-names.
> > > You can append as many laryngeals as
> > > you like to *bHr.g^H- and still get Celt. *brig-.
> >
> > Bhrihskwobhloukstroy:
> > We are still back at my message of 2012/5/12, 21:36. What about "OIr.
> > alt -o-, n. 'joint, articulation, state' : Gk. péplos, laryngealless
> > (does it exist?) 3. √*pel- (Pokorny 802-803, Mallory - Adams 1997:
> > 63)? Matasović's *pol-to- (121) implies a loan from Germanic, but
> > *po:l-to-m would be regular."
> > Anders <ollga_loudec@> wrote (2012/5/12, 23:50) "Sure,
> > this is a possible etymology. The meaning of *pel- seems to be 'to
> > fold', from which 'joint, articulation' is a plausible development.
> > But the etymology is hardly inevitable." Do You want still more? Then
> > I ask You to provide, please, evidence for the development */o:rC/ >
> > /orC/. I repeat that every instance of such development can per
> > definitionem be analysed as PIE normal short */orC/, so a clear
> > counterexample is virtually impossible.
>
> If Matasovic' is correct in deriving Celt. *barro- 'point, top' by normalizing an old root-noun *bHr.s-, nom. sg. *bHo:rs, he appears to support your position.

Gee, it's fun playing devil's advocate. If M.'s mechanism for deriving *barro- is acceptable, you (Bh.) could dispense with questionably motivated vr.ddhi-formations, and get Celt. *bargo- from another normalized root-noun, *bHr.g^H-/*bHorg^H-, nom. sg. *bHo:rg^H-s (presumably *bHo:rk^s, but speakers would be aware of the "deep structure"). That is, */o:/ would be generalized throughout the paradigm (as in Gmc. 'foot', etc.), and then a new thematic noun *bHo:rg^Ho- would be formed (like the Skt. by-form <pada-> 'foot', but with lengthened grade because it had been generalized in the root-noun already). Then, *bHo:rg^Ho- > Paleo-Celtic *bo:rgo- > *ba:rgo- > *bargo- by Osthoff. QED.

This is where distribution begins to matter. If Barg-place-names are not commonly found throughout the whole Pan-Celtic realm, but a cluster includes Greater Liguria (with the Serchio and Lima valleys, where Pieri extracted *barga), then it would appear (under your Pan-Celtic model) that those ultra-conservative Porcoberan Celts, who were so good at holding their /p/, were also very good at using *Barg- as opposed to mainstream Celts. In fact, all your model does is project the base of Celticity downward, so that /p/-retaining Ligurians are renamed as ultra-conservative /p/-retaining Porcoberan Celts. Now, what scholarly purpose can that serve? "I hereby plant this flag and claim this land for /p/-retaining Celts!"

DGK