--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> The diminutive suffix <-ila> forms so-called "weak" or nasal stems
(*-il-o:n-), though the final nasal is invisible in the nom.sg.
(there are also "weak" neuters with this suffix, e.g. Goth.
barnilo: 'little child', mawilo: 'young maiden' = OE meowle). Cf.
also Old Runic niuwila 'novice', In <erilaz> (note the final -z) the
suffix is "strong" *-il-a-z, which apparently reflects PIE noun- and
adjective-forming *-(e)lo-s, perhaps ultimately related to Germanic
diminutive <-ila> but not sharing its function. It can form, among
other things, names of social roles or occupations (cf. Gk.
doulos 'servant, slave' < *doselos, angelos 'messenger').
>
> The etymology and original meaning of *erilaz (< *er-elo-s ?) are
uncertain. Old Runic formulaic <ek erilaz ...> is routinely
translated as 'I, the runemaster, ...' or alternatively as 'I, the
nobleman, ...'. Germanic cognates (OE eorl, OM jarl, OSax. erl) are
social rank or status terms ('earl, warrior, high-born'). I suspect
*erilaz formed an antonymous pair with *karilaz 'man, free peasant,
farmer' (ON karl, OE ceorl.
>
> Piotr
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: george knysh
> To: cybalist@...
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 5:01 PM
> Subject: [tied] A "Germanic" query
>
>
> Is the term for the Herulians ("Erila") in the same
> category as diminutives such as Attila and Wulfila, or
> is this purely coincidental?
How does one explain the vanishing <h-> of Heruli vs. erila- ?
Torsten