Latin perfects and Fluent Etruscan in 30 days!

[Damien Erwan Perrotin]

>Eduard Selleslagh wrote
>Thank you for the interesting and informative contribution. Here are a few
>side remarks.
>1. I got confused by Breton 'afan': I had interpreted the f as /v/, like in
>Welsh.

Yes, I should hace precised this. Breton spelling is derivated from
French

>2. It seems that your reasoning brings Catalan 'amb' ('with', from Latin
>'apud') and Latin 'apud' back into the picture.

that is possible, but we must remain prudent, as there is no ettested
equivalent in Etruscan.

>3. Not only the Sanskrit dative plura in -bh-, but also the Latin one -ibus.

Yes, and probably the -m ending of the slavic and germanic tongues (from
*mbh). I was giving Sanskrit as an exemple (Irish -aibh should work
too).

>4. Note that Breton/Welsh 'aber' corresponds to the Dutch/Flemish (Belgae!)
>river names 'Amel' and 'Amer' (the latter is also used to refer to the
>neighboring flood plain or 'polder' ('vega' in Spanish). So the sound
>change m/b works both ways exchanges among the languages we were discussing.

We know almost nothing about the Belgian tongue, not even if it was
celtic, or member of some "north-western block", so that a relationship
is possible. The standart etymology for aber (old Welsh aper, Pictish
place-manes abar) is ad-bero "to out flow", where the second member is
the IE verb *bher (probably not *mbher as the possible Etruscan
counterpart would be farth- (to bring, to offer), not *mart or *amart)
this etymology is co,firmed by Breton Kemper (the confluence) which can
be analyzed as ken-bero (the place wher it flows together). Still it is
possible that Belgian, or the peri-indo-european neolithic tongue which
could have preceded it changed its bh to m or that the first member of
the name of these river was *H2embh (around), yielding something as
*H2embh-bher (the one which is flowing around) later simplified in Amer.
But this is hypothetical.

>5. Maybe the (Etruscan, Lydian,.. later Latin) am- and the IE-Latin amb-
>roots just share a common ancestry like the languages themselves (one or
>two steps before PIE) , then developed more or less separately but got
>exchanged among parallel branches of the Stammbaum at several moments and
>in several places (Anatolia, Italy,...).

Possible but the phonetics seems to me rather uncertain.
Another gypothesis is that Etruscan Am was not Etruscan in the first
place but was borrowed from the (Anatolian ?) tongue of the Teresh, a
sea people which is said to have landed there after having been housted
fro Egypt. The change would have been done in the Egean region and would
have been specific to the Anatolian tongues of the place (hence the
Lydian). Still remains the Breton form (a borrowing to Rhaetic in the
Alpine region, or brought in by Etruscan traders ??? Highly hypothetical
anyway). I would not bet my wages on this however.

>Ed.

>P.S.
>1. Are you Breton?

Yes, but from the French speaking eastern part of the country. I learned
the language during my teens.

Damien Erwan Perrotin