Talk:Celtiberian language

message: The article also states "Brythonic is more closely related to Goidelic than to Gaulish". If that is so, why did countless Roman-era commentators claim that the language of Britannia (ancestral to Welsh and Breton) and that of Gaul were practically the same and mutually intelligible, while even the oldest Irish is visibly quite different from either? I really do live in hope that there are whole texts in Gaulish and other continental P-Celtic tongues still hiding somewhere, which when discovered and compared with early Welsh and Irish will bury the "Insular Celtic" theory for good. To me (I have a linguistics degree) that theory is like claiming English and Icelandic form "Insular Germanic" together due to their both retaining the proto-Germanic th-sounds, ignoring all the evidence linking them to Frisian and Danish, respectively.Walshie79 (talk) 20:04, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: You can hardly take the word of Latin-speaking commentators for it; they weren't linguists and really didn't care in the least what those barbarians in Gaul and Britain spoke, let alone the even more barbarian barbarians in Hibernia outside the Empire. The oldest Irish, from the Ogham inscriptions, is not really all that different from the oldest Gaulish and British inscriptions, though we have so little of any of them (and so little with any grammar worth mentioning) it's difficult to be sure. But the evidence really does point to Goidelic and Brythonic descending from a common ancestor that Gaulish and Celtiberian do not descend from, because of the large number of common innovations they have, such as VSO word order and the highly idiosyncratic sound change of /m/ to /ṽ/ after a vowel, which is unlikely to have happened more than once (unlike the Brythonic and Gaulish sound change of /kʷ/ to /p/, which is very common and could easily have happened twice independently). There's lots more evidence in the literature, but it's discussed at the Insular Celtic languages article, not here (where it wouldn't belong). If you have a linguistics degree, you should know that the decision whether two languages are to be grouped together is based on common innovations (which Goidelic and Brythonic have) and not on common retentions (as English and Icelandic have). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:58, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Revisited, July 2014

message: These Celtiberian articles are actually full of confusion about the Celtic languages that once were spoken by old Pre-Roman Hispanic people. Celtiberian language is actually a group of related dialects mainly spoken in central Spain and upper Ebro's valley. Hispano-Celtic or Iberian-Proto-Celtic is another group of extinct Celtic languages spoken all along the Iberian Atlantic shores by Lusitanian, Germanian and Artabric tribes. They must not be merged one group with another. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.147.142.6 (talk • contribs) 10:08, 22 May 2006   (UTC)
:Hmm... that's not the impression I get from reading Joseph Eska. He uses the term "Hispano-Celtic" but freely admits it refers to the same language that other people call "Celtiberian". Angr (t • c) 10:56, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Two different languages... at least!!

message: The examples given in the article show that Celtiberian was IE but not I think that it was Celtic. To do that you would have to demonstrate shared *derived* characters (e.g. loss of PIE /p/, /e:/ > /i:/ etc.). Otherwise it might be for example a stray Italic language, or IE branch all of its own.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.85.180.97 (talk) 15:03, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It is definitely Celtic - thanks for pointing out the lack of detail in this article - there is the loss of PIE /p/ etc. so it is not Italic - I will put up some examples for you.Jembana (talk) 22:45, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Celtic Innovative Features?

message: Someone ought to add a section about the theories of language transfer in Iberia during the Roman occupation. The linguistic map of Spain today remains more or less unchanged from the pre-Latin period; speakers of the Ibero tongues, when speaking Latin, became Catalan; Celtiberian became Castillian; Tardossian became Andalusian dialects of Castillian, and so on. There is some excellent studies on this topic that would add to this article.Blander2 (talk) 01:18, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Catalan, Castilian, and Andalusian are all descended from Latin. Celtiberian and Tardossian died out completely without any descendant languages. Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Celtiberian as protoCastilian  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Celtiberian language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081006160601/http://www.arqueotavira.com/Mapas/Iberia/Populi.htm to http://www.arqueotavira.com/Mapas/Iberia/Populi.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:15, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm leaving here a link on Celtiberian onomastics: Santano Moreno Julián. Celtibérico boustom, iberorromance busto “pastizal, vacada” y bosta “boniga”. In: Nouvelle revue d'onomastique, n°56, 2014. pp. 227-262. [DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/onoma.2014.1809] [www.persee.fr/doc/onoma_0755-7752_2014_num_56_1_1809] 01:53, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Celtiberian Onomastics 

message: There may be some case for using a lang template on an extinct language with very little available text, but I’m having a hard time thinking of one and none of the rationales apply, so I’m removing the cleanup tag.
It would be more productive to add the templates if you think it’s important, rather than adding a cleaup tag. ⚜ Moilleadóir ✍ 04:10, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing { {cleanup lang} } template