[tied] Re: Pre-Germanic speculation

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski"
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

>
> OK, so I tell you what I think about this type of placename. I may

be wrong,

> but my opinion is based on my familiarity with English toponyms.

The type

> ...s-ø looks very similar to English island names such as Selsey,

Mersea or

> Bardsea/Bardsey. They are certainly not substratal but consist of a

genitive

> plus OE -i:(e)g 'island' = Danish -ø (very often the genitive is

formed from

> an owner's name, e.g. Beornre:des i:eg, telescoped into modern

Bardsea).

> Since OIc. Sámr, ODan. Sam is an attested personal name, we can

regard the

> Sams- part as a fossilised genitive -- Sam's Island. Now the common
> adjective <sámr> _is_ connected with Saami: it means 'swarthy, dark-

skinned'

> (the Norse stereotype of a Lapp), but of course it doesn't mean

that the

> name was given by Finno-Ugrians or even that any of them ever lived

in that

> area. It was a Norse name and was brought to Denmark by Norse-

speakers.

Danish -ø is certainly "island". It comes from Old Norse ey "island"
< *awi:, etc... It is of IE origin.
But I have still objections:

1) Old Norse sámr has a long vowel.
Since you dismiss the connection of Samsø with Saami, Suomi because
Saami has a long vowel, you contradict yourself.
2) It is not proven that Old norse sámr is of IE origin.
3) The more ancient and conservative form of the toponym is Sams,
without -ø "island", so your analysis is at least dubious.

> As I have said before it's only too easy to make silly mistakes if

you

> attempt to investigate placenames without studying their history.

It's paper

> linguistics without any real value. With your methods you might be

tempted

> to see non-IE "substratal elements" and an "Etruscan" suffix -s- in

English

> Alston, Selsey, etc. Fortunately, we know their true etymology.

Ironically,

> they may contain _non-substratal_ non-IE elements, e.g. Selsey

is 'Seal

> Island' and OE seolh 'seal' is ultimately non-IE, but the placename

in

> Sussex was given by the Saxons who had brought the word with them to
> Britain, and therefore does not come from a local substrate.

I know the history of English, so I'm not tempted to find some
Etruscan in Alston and similar forms. These -s- is an IE genitive
deriving from *-os(j)o. We have Anglo-Saxon attestation, and we know
the place of English within the Germanic languages. We also know
Danish and its derivation from Old Norse, but the history of Denmark
before the arrival of IE speakers is unknow to us.
On the contrary we know well that in Britain there were Celtic people
before the arrival of Anglo-Saxon. The change of language occurred in
more recent times. There are even today regions that are Celtic
speaking. We have attestations of the former Celtic and Roman history
of England. Only the Picts are still misterious.
But can you describe me the history of Chaidemioi for Norway?

Marco