Re: Oesysla/Eysysla etc.

--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: tgpedersen@...
> To: cybalist@...
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:42 PM
> Subject: [tied] Re: Oesysla/Eysysla etc.
>
>
> > Let me see if I understand you correctly.
> > We have an unattested language *A, from which are descended

languages B1, B2, and B3. A certain root occurs in B1, but not in B2
and B3.

> > Therefore it did not occur in *A. Is this what you mean?
>
> Precisely. That's what we assume in science, unless there is some

evidence to the contrary (e.g. the existence of the word in a related
outgroup). Occam's Razor, or the principle of parsimony.

Do we? That's not the Occam's razor I know. I suppose that means that
if a word in a West Germanic language doesn't exist in Old Norse,
then it's not in PGmc. either?

>
>
> >>... a name more logical from the point of view of the Finnic

natives, for whom it has always been "The Island".

>
> > Really? And what was Hiamaa then to them?
>
> I don't know what the Hiiu- in Hiiumaa means, my knowledge of

historical Estonian is limited. If there are any Baltic Finnic
experts or Estonian-speakers among our members, maybe they can help.

Yes. Then they can also tell us if Saremaa was always "the island" to
those natives.

>But Saaremaa is *the* major island in those parts, more than twice

as big as Hiiumaa.

>
> Piotr

Sjælland is twice the size of the next island, Fyn, but nobody here
calls it "the island" (some Jutlanders call it Devil's Island, but
that's a bit off the point).

Torsten