I doubt it, since the combination is rare
and the Older Runic records are few, but since early Runic did not lose its
<h> in any other position (preserving e.g. hr-, hl-, and -VhV-),
you'd have to resort to ad hoc pleading to account for the absence of
<h> and the presence of a vowel. Old English lost *x between vowels
and also when preceded by a liquid and followed by a vowel
(e.g. <seolh> 'seal [Phoca]' vs. pl. <se:olas> from
*selxo:s), but not in <-rhl-> (<earhlic> 'cowardly',
etc.).
Examples of WGmc. erla- are OE eorl
'warrior; ealdorman' (ModE earl), OSax. erl (glossed 'vir'), and OHG erl- in
compound names. There is nothing to suggest that a Scandinavian import
(actually, attestation in Older Runic strongly suggests that the word is at
least common NWGermanic), though as a result of OE/Scandinavian contacts the
meaning of OE eorl (as an official title' was influenced by that of
its ON cognate, <jarl>.
Piotr
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 9:11
AM
Subject: [tied] Re: A "Germanic"
query
If the Heruli were driven from their settlements by the
Dani it is
safe to assume that those settlements were within the North
Germanic
speaking area. Therefore W. Germanic *erla- (examples?) might be
an
import.
/x/ would have been lost in some contexts before others. Are
there
any examples of Runic -rxl-?