> > There are some curiosities, also, in the treatise. For examaple,

ON verr ('man'/'being'/etc. is from Proto-Norse *weraz from PIE
*wiros), where the vowel is natural e, not the i-mutation of a (i.e.
short æ), is written with a short æ in the treatise in the same
section you quote from (the letter used is e with a small hook under
it = short æ). This really does not work etymologically speaking and
my better judgement tells me that it is not correct.

> Einar Haugen suggests the open vowel here is due to the influence
> of /r/. I don't know if there's any evidence to support this.

Not that I know of. Note also that I corrected myself to 'natural e'
above from 'natural a' (a misprint from writing and thinking to fast.
My point is that ON verr is from PN *weraz PIE *wiros and that we are
dealing with e here and not æ, as the Treatise would seem to indicate.
Now, this is hardly a harsh criticism, as the author was clearly well
informed and well ahead of his time, showing unusual lucidity about
language during a time when Catholic education simply stated that all
languages come from Hebrew. If it's not Hebrew it was corrupted by God
at the Tower of Babel because the speakers were were not chosen people
or for some reason were considered inferior/unbelievers, etc.. Thus,
if one compares such thinking to the First Grammarian, one sees that
his thinking was well ahead of his time. I am very impressed :)

Regards,
Konrad

> Llama Nom