Re: OE *picga

--- In cybalist@..., "Richard Wordingham" <richard.wordingham@...>
wrote:

> --- In cybalist@..., Piotr Gasiorowski <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Richard Wordingham
> > To: cybalist@...
> > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 2:14 PM
> > Subject: [tied] Re: OE *picga
> >
> > It's free variation, as far as I can see, just like there being

no

> orthographic contrast between /k/ and /tS/ in Old English.
>
> Except before back vowels.
>
> > Did you say Hogg? All right, he will testify. Here is what

Richard

> Hogg says in _A Grammar of Old English [Vol.1: Phonology]_ (1992,
> Oxford: Blackwell):
> >
> > "Naturally [gg], which was undoubtedly a geminate stop, could

only

> arise by processes other than WGmc gemination, since [gg] by that
> process develops as /dZ/. The problem is that the words which

contain

> [gg] are not only of dubious etymology but are also members of a
> clear semantic set, largely animal pet-names, such as

_docga_ 'dog',

> _frogga_ 'frog', *_picga_ 'pig', *_stagga_ 'stag' [here the scribal
> variation is Hocg's... sorry, Hogg's own], _sugga_ 'sparrow',
> _wicga_ 'earwig'. As such, the status of [gg] is rather less clear
> than it might be, since it would seem to have some phonaesthetic
> force..."
> >
> > He also notes that <sceacga> is possibly a borrowing from ON
> (though one wonders why we have <shag> rather than +<skag> then).
>
> And the ON form with a geminate is skeggr 'beard', so the vowel
> doesn't fit either.
>
> > > Is the expressive gemination of voiced consonants OE, Germanic

or

> Scandinavian (cf Swedish sugga 'sow')? Moreover, what is being
> geminated in Frogga & co? <-gga>/<-cga> looks like a word-
> > classifying suffix, akin to '-er' in German animal words.
> >
> > It's OE in these words, but there are similar tendencies

throughout

> Germanic (plus analogies in Greek, Latin and Celtic). To form a
> hypocorism, take a word and truncate it (if you think it's too

long),

> leaving only the initial syllable and the onset of the second; you
> may geminate the latter, and if you manipulate its phonation in the
> process, or mutilate what used to be a cluster, nobody will mind;
> finally, add weak-noun inflections. "What is your name, boy?
> Wulfhere? That sounds too serious; we shall call you Wuffa." The
> operation of the process is easy to see in <frox, frosc> ->

<frogga>.

>
> I can see *frocca > dialect 'frock' (cited in Falk & Torp, who
> propose a different derivation), but do you have examples of the
> mangled onset being more marked? The other forms still seem to

have

> a <-cga> suffix, unless one can derive 'wicga' from something like

OE

> <wagian> = 'totter', 'sway' (>? 'wag') or an unattested ancestor
> of 'wiggle'.
>
> > statistically correct
> That's a good way of saying wrong but usually good enough!
>
> Richard.

from EIEC:

*weghyo
vigg "horse" Old Norse
wicg "horse" Old English

but it's probably not an earhorse.

Torsten