I repeat (since I have already explained
this) and expand a little: the correct singular is Vanr (actually used of of
Njörd), declined like an ordinary a-stem masculine (which it is: *wanaz). The
plural in -ir is neither irregular nor analogical but reflects a Germanic
_collective_ (like ON Danir 'the Danes' and several other tribal nouns, or OE
Engle, etc.), behaving like an i-stem (-ir < *-i:z < *-ijiz). In ON the
collective suffix did not trigger palatal umlaut in the root (though it often
did in OE). Some ethnonyms could have both a normal plural and a "collective
plural", e.g. ON Húnar/Húnir or OE Seaxan/Seaxe.
Hope this helps and stops that Wagnerian
speculation.
Piotr
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Vanir
I think *Wagn- would give Vagn- or Vakk-, nor
Vanir.
And my question remains: what is the Germanic form of Vanir?
what´s its
singular?
*Wanaz - Vann, pl. Vanar (maybe pl. Vanir due
analogy with Aesir)
*Waniz - Venn, pl. Venir
*Wanuz - Vo,nn pl.
Vanir
What´s the correct declination of Vanir?