PROTO-LUSITANIAN & PROTO-ITALIC 

@Nwk843 I asked if it was cognate with the PL word 'indi'. Since we see from the PIE _*h₂énti_ that t > d and also a voicing of plosives in other other positions such at in the PL _*decan_ where _c_ is reconstructed as */g/. It's also not a stretch to conceive that /a/ > /i/ because of the /i/ in the following syllable after */h₂é/ > */a/. The accepted Proto-Germanic reconstruction is _*andi/anþi._ English didn't combine the German and Luxembourg conjunctions. _And_ is definitely not a simplification of _and_ and _the_ since _and_ predates the word _the_ in English since _the_ arose after the Old English period where _and_ was _and/ond._

It's interesting how you see the changes from t to d and c to g, just like Celtic mutations.

These mutations are normal in many languages... ​@@markadams6497

No

doubt it, it isn't even clear whether Lusitanian is celtic or italic.

​@@fgconnolly4170 worth noting that what you watched in this video is just an assumptive reconstruction. There are theories that suggest that Lusitanians weren't indo-european

@@tcbbctagain572 oh I didn't know that