Thank you for timely
self-correction which has substantiantly reduced the amount of letters I am to
type in, but some questions still exists.
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but an average Goth called
himself guda (>, by the way, Slavic *gUdU
'Goth'), and this (rather late) Latin spelling (Gothae) seems mysterious to me.
As for th for dental fricative in Latin, it seemes to be
probable, but do we have any plausible examples? Why not just simplification
like Teudones, and then assimilation like
Teutones? Why Romans should make efforts to render
fricatives as preicsely as possible while Slavs, whose proto-language renders
thiuda- as *tjudjI,
shouldn't?
Sergei
Verner's Law applies here, and the Germanic word for "people" is *TiuDa- (T & D = English voiceless and voiced th, respectively; cf. Gothic thiuda-, Old English theod). My guess is that the second stop would have been rendered as Latin d (cf. Charivaldus), and the first probably as aspirated th (as in the name of the Goths, Lat. Gothae). I'd bet on something like Theudones.Piotr
How do you think shifted stops would look like in Roman rendering? *s-s? *f-f? (or -z if the first syllable was unstressed in Germanic word and this letter and its Hellenistic phonetical meaning [z] (not [zd]/[dz]) had been already adapted?) Is there a consistent way of rendering dental fricatives in Classical Latin?SergeiWho knows if the Teutons who joined the Cimbri in their southward raid in the late 2nd century BC weren't NWB-speakers rather than Germani proper. The unshifted stops of Teut- might suggest that (the usual story is that the name is of Celtic origin). Just a loose thought, don't take it too seriously.Piotr
eGroups.com Home: http://www.egroups.com/group/cybalist
www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications