Re: The Brzhona.

[raybrown@macline.co.uk (Raymond A. Brown)]

At 15:28 25/6/98, Padraic Brown wrote:
[.....]
>
>Wouldn't the Franks (or whatever other invading Germans) have been
>responsible for the ultimate demise of Gaulish, and also the Gauls
>themselves?

The Germanic invaders of Gaul & Spain seems to have had little effect on
the language other than providing some military vocab, colors of horses &c.
The evidence is very much that vulgar Latin had totally replaced the
native Celtic languages of these areas (and, indeed, of northern Italy)
well before the end of the Empire.  I think you're right about the Gauls
themselves, however.  It was a question of learning the language of the
conqueror to further your own interests.

One finds that the same attitude prevailed in certain parts of south Wales
into the early years of this century where Welsh speakers deliberately
prevented their children aquiring their native language because English was
the language of progress & advancement.  Thankfully, that attitude has
largely, I believe, disappeared.

[.....]
>>
>> I must confess I haven't read the 'alternate history' closely, but *here*
>> Britanny wasn't finally brought under centralized French control until the
>> Revolutionaries closed down the Breton parliament.
>
>Of course, this may not be the case *there*, as the Revolution must
>undoubtedly take a different course (no US model, for one and no Merkian
>influence); perhaps Kemran intervention previous to this time (i.e.,
>perhaps the ties between the two (Kemr and Britanny) are 'more' than just
>cultural and linguistic).

No quarrel with that.  As I said,  haven't read the 'alternate history'
closely.  France may still be a monarchy *there* for all I know!  (And the
Holy Roman Empire might be around??)

Ray.