Zompist Bboard Again

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Wed Jul 14, 2021 6:46 pmOf course, Thracian was never spoken in the Iberian Peninsula, nor in Western Europe in general. But what I don't get is how the alleged connection between Thracian and Baltic (which is at least conceivable, even if the paper you linked to doesn't really make a good job proving it) supports your idea of a "Baltoid" language in the Iberian Peninsula?! That is what I mean by "geographic confusion": you argue that something has happened in one place because it happened in another very different place. This is not the first time you argue in this jumpy way, and it means nothing because that way, any kind of connection can be drawn. When will you understand that this won't convince anyone?

I see. What I intended to mean is there're some evidence (although a scanty one) of "Baltoid" loanwords in Western Europe, and Thracian happens to be both a "Baltoid" language and likely the source of some loanwords into Greek. Sorry for the confusion.

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Wed Jul 14, 2021 6:46 pm

Talskubilos wrote: ↑Wed Jul 14, 2021 4:00 pmOn the other hand, Iberian baides 'witness' is a recurring term in inscriptions and it's surely a loanword from some reflex of IE *weid-.

What does tell us that this is a loan specifically from "Baltoid", rather than from some other IE language (maybe a Southern IE one?), or just a chance resemblance? And where did you find the meaning of this Iberian word?

It's on the literature (mostly in Spanish, of course). However, the etymology is mine, and the /a/ vocalism points to an IE language which had no /o/. On the other hand, I've already mentioned dialectal Basque sarda 'fish school' < IE *ḱerd-, which also gave saldo/(t)alde 'herd, flock'.

"Baltoid" in Western Europe is not far from "Vasco-Caucasian" in validity...

Travis B. wrote: ↑Thu Jul 15, 2021 3:41 pm"Baltoid" in Western Europe is not far from "Vasco-Caucasian" in validity...

They've nothing in common.

Both are highly speculative entities, and not really helpful. It is not impossible (indeed, IMHO not unlikely, see my "Southern IE" hypothesis) that there was some kind of IE in Western Europe, perhaps associated with the Bell Beaker culture, that was later obliterated by Italic, Celtic and Germanic, but we know nothing about the phonological developments in those languages, and assuming that they were similar to the Baltic ones is special pleading. With the "right" assumptions about phonological developments, you can construct an IE etymology for almost everything, making the endeavour completely worthless. You know the saying among historical linguists: One cognate is no cognate.

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 8:41 am You know the saying among historical linguists: One cognate is no cognate.

Somehow one substrate or adstrate word seems even worse.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 1:09 pm

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 8:41 am You know the saying among historical linguists: One cognate is no cognate.

Somehow one substrate or adstrate word seems even worse.

Yep. Saying that a word is from a hypothetical substratum language is a not-so-clever way of dodging the admittance that the etymology is unknown.

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 1:38 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 1:09 pm

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 8:41 am You know the saying among historical linguists: One cognate is no cognate.

Somehow one substrate or adstrate word seems even worse.

Yep. Saying that a word is from a hypothetical substratum language is a not-so-clever way of dodging the admittance that the etymology is unknown.

It's different when the substrate or adstrate language is clearly known and interaction between the source language(s) and the destination languages is easily justified, and there are clear signs of borrowing on a good-sized set of words, e.g. all the early Latinate, Romance, and Greek loans in Germanic, or the loans from Germanic into Finnic, or the loans between Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic, and so on.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 2:10 pm

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 1:38 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 1:09 pm

Somehow one substrate or adstrate word seems even worse.

Yep. Saying that a word is from a hypothetical substratum language is a not-so-clever way of dodging the admittance that the etymology is unknown.

It's different when the substrate or adstrate language is clearly known and interaction between the source language(s) and the destination languages is easily justified, and there are clear signs of borrowing on a good-sized set of words, e.g. all the early Latinate, Romance, and Greek loans in Germanic, or the loans from Germanic into Finnic, or the loans between Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic, and so on.

Of course! That is a very different thing, and not what I meant. What is wrong with "Baltoid" is that it is an unknown entity for which no positive evidence exists. Of course, there are lots of words that are well-acceptedly loanwords from known source languages.

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 6:01 amWhat is wrong with "Baltoid" is that it is an unknown entity for which no positive evidence exists. Of course, there are lots of words that are well-acceptedly loanwords from known source languages.

The thing is attested languages are only the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. There must be lots of submerged languages in Europe which only survived in the form of loanwords. In the case of Western Europe (including the Iberian Peninsula) there were other IE languages before Italic and Celtic appeared.

Talskubilos wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 6:48 am

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 6:01 amWhat is wrong with "Baltoid" is that it is an unknown entity for which no positive evidence exists. Of course, there are lots of words that are well-acceptedly loanwords from known source languages.

The thing is attested languages are only the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. There must be lots of submerged languages in Europe which only survived in the form of loanwords.

No-one is disputing this. What we are sceptical about is the notion that it is possible to say anything at all about these languages, given that, as you say, they remain only as a handful of difficult-to-assign loanwords.

bradrn wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 6:51 amNo-one is disputing this. What we are sceptical about is the notion that it is possible to say anything at all about these languages, given that, as you say, they remain only as a handful of difficult-to-assign loanwords.

Well, this is precisely a matter for research.

Talskubilos wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 7:00 am

bradrn wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 6:51 amNo-one is disputing this. What we are sceptical about is the notion that it is possible to say anything at all about these languages, given that, as you say, they remain only as a handful of difficult-to-assign loanwords.

Well, this is precisely a matter for research.

Yes, but that research needs more solid ground. You are doing little more than poking around in the dark.

Talskubilos wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 7:00 am

bradrn wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 6:51 amNo-one is disputing this. What we are sceptical about is the notion that it is possible to say anything at all about these languages, given that, as you say, they remain only as a handful of difficult-to-assign loanwords.

Well, this is precisely a matter for research.

as Methos once said, You're not listening. There is no way to well-research something like this, beyond general descriptives and cataloging what they look like (through the lens of the intervening scripts and oral languages)

More than that is, its wishing, and maybe a bit of horse-beating.

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 9:45 am

Talskubilos wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 7:00 am

bradrn wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 6:51 amNo-one is disputing this. What we are sceptical about is the notion that it is possible to say anything at all about these languages, given that, as you say, they remain only as a handful of difficult-to-assign loanwords.

Well, this is precisely a matter for research.

Yes, but that research needs more solid ground. You are doing little more than poking around in the dark.

Does any solid ground remain/exist after all this time? Talskibilos is poking in the dark, and saying new terrain is discovered.

keenir wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:24 pm

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 9:45 am

Talskubilos wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 7:00 am Well, this is precisely a matter for research.

Yes, but that research needs more solid ground. You are doing little more than poking around in the dark.

Does any solid ground remain/exist after all this time? Talskibilos is poking in the dark, and saying new terrain is discovered.

There indeed is very little solid ground. There are of course Basque (and the Basque spoken 2,000 years ago can be reconstructed because the language is full of Latin loanwords which can be used to retrace the sound changes) and the various Continental Celtic languages (which are only sparsely attested, but have close living relatives - the Insular Celtic languages - and are of course IE, allowing us to make good guesses about many of the gaps); Etruscan is already difficult, and Iberian (there are some hints that it may be related to Basque, but so far, Basque has not been very helpful in understanding Iberian, and the hazard of circular reasoning is great) and Tartessian (the claim by John T. Koch, a specialist in Medieval Insular Celtic literature, that it was Celtic has been rejected by most Celticists) are a mystery. And what concerns languages without any written records, we can indeed only make guesses. So real scholars advance very cautiously as there is so little light, and even their cautious advancements are subject of passionate debates.

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 3:17 pmThere indeed is very little solid ground. There are of course Basque (and the Basque spoken 2,000 years ago can be reconstructed because the language is full of Latin loanwords which can be used to retrace the sound changes)

Well, I'm not sure this would be the real Proto-Basque or some kind of Vasco-Romance language (i.e. a Romance variety embedded in Basque).

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 3:17 pmand Tartessian (the claim by John T. Koch, a specialist in Medieval Insular Celtic literature, that it was Celtic has been rejected by most Celticists) are a mystery.

Although certainly not Celtic, Tartessian could be still an IE language, perhaps a "Baltoid" one.

Talskubilos wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 3:10 pm

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 3:17 pmThere indeed is very little solid ground. There are of course Basque (and the Basque spoken 2,000 years ago can be reconstructed because the language is full of Latin loanwords which can be used to retrace the sound changes)

Well, I'm not sure this would be the real Proto-Basque or some kind of Vasco-Romance language (i.e. a Romance variety embedded in Basque).

Um...the working assumption is that the Romance loanwords undergo the same sound changes as the rest of the vocabulary, just as we see with the Celtic or the Germanic languages.

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 4:48 pm

Talskubilos wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 3:10 pmWell, I'm not sure this would be the real Proto-Basque or some kind of Vasco-Romance language (i.e. a Romance variety embedded in Basque).

Um...the working assumption is that the Romance loanwords undergo the same sound changes as the rest of the vocabulary, just as we see with the Celtic or the Germanic languages.

But these loanwords underwent different changes depending on the chronology and the source.

Talskubilos wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:46 pm Basque).But these loanwords underwent different changes depending on the chronology and the source.

Yeah…same as with those other languages. Your point?

Talskubilos, what I read out of your reactions amounts to "Please put out that lamp. I want to continue poking around in the dark!"