Talk:P-Celtic and Q-Celtic languages

[Untitled]
I strongly feel that this page and Q-Celtic should redirect to Celtic languages or else be expanded, rewritten, and ideally moved to "P-Celtic hypothesis". It's at Celtic languages that there have been discussions and edit wars concerning the P-Celtic hypothesis versus the Insular Celtic hypothesis – both of which have academic support. P-Celtic is not synonymous with Brythonic, because P-Celtic includes Gaulish; and Q-Celtic is not synonymous with Goidelic, because Q-Celtic includes Lepontic and Celtiberian... Oh, lord, I feel like I'm just repeating myself. The article Celtic languages just isn't big enough to merit being broken up into all these smaller articles yet. QuartierLatin1968 15:42, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Nobody has objected, so I'll do it. Biscuittin 22:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

P-Celtic/Q-Celtic hypothesis
I have split out Q-Celtic hypothesis/ P-Celtic hypothesis into brief articles that redirect back to Celtic languages. I have used only information from that page. Lucian Sunday (talk) 15:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I do not think this was a good idea. "P-Celtic" also isn't necessarily a hypothesis, it may also refer simply to a typological grouping, not including any hypothetical claims. --dab (𒁳) 18:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with this last point. It is a fact, not a hypothesis, that some of these languages use p/b where others use q/c, and if the terminology is intended only to describe this (which is how I would use it), and not to imply a stemma reconstruction, it is uncontroversial. (In this sense it is rather like Italo-Celtic, which can be highly controversial or entirely uncontroversial depending on whether it is linked to a stemma hypothesis or is merely understood typologically.) Incidentally, I would have spelled this with lower case letters: p-Celtic and q-Celtic. --Doric Loon (talk) 13:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)