--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: tgpedersen
> To: cybalist@...
> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:39 PM
> Subject: [tied] Re: IRMIN
>
>
> [Piotr:] OHD irmandiot (here <d> is from the HG shift, not
Vernerian),
>
> [Torsten:] No, it's from T- -> D- -> d-, which is common Dutch and
(High and
> Low) German (duits, deutsch).
>
> [Piotr:] I mean the phonation shift in fricatives. Word-initially,
the voicing is even shared with southern Middle English. It was a
diffused change, affecting several neighbouring West Germanic
languages, though not in the exact same way. I just wanted to point
out that it took place in (Old) High German, not earlier.
>
[Torsten:] I see. Yes I pointed out that shared voicing some time
back. Wonder if it had anything to do with a possible Celtic
substrate and those languages' apparent lack of feel for word
boundaries. Anyway, interesting with a Germanic dialect isogloss that
crosses the Channel.
> ----------
>
> [Torsten:] Exactly. So as long as <þu:r> remains recognizable to
the Germanic speakers, it's *ermVn-þur. After that, it's ermVn-Dur
(edh).
>
> [Piotr:] Not if the term was borrowed _after_ Verner's Law. I'd
also claim that any *ermVn-X compound must have remained analysable
even if the speakers were no longer aware what the X part was. Modern
English speakers are able to recognise <over-> and <un-> in
<overwhelm> or <uncouth> even though <-whelm> and <-couth> are 100%
obscure.
>
[Torsten:] But why should it not have been borrowed into Germanic
before, to denote descendants of Tu:r? Judging from the tribal name
Turini (cf Augusta Turinum -> Torino, and Tu:r-ik- -> Zürich) they
(or other Tu:r peoples) had been in the general neighborhood before.
And the <harfaDa> mountains show Germanic speakers were in the area
before the first shift, hence also before Verner.
> ----------
>
> [Torsten:] This might cause confusion in the <tu:ring> word, and
that's what we have; there is a Thüringische Chronica, also known as
Düringsche Chronica, cf. the family name Düring (said Chronica
maintains BTW that the Thuringians are descended from the Tyragetai,
who would then be Tyrage-tai). /d-/ is what we should expect here
from <Tur-ing->, not /t-/.
>
> [Piotr:] If there's any "confusion" here, it's of late origin.
Düring- is the regular development of *þuring-, and Thüring- is an
artificially Latinised form. Jacob Grimm thought that the names of
the Hermun-duri and Thur-ingians were related, but of course Grimm
did not understand the þ~d alternation yet.
>
[Torsten:] Artificially Latinized from what? What were they trying to
derive it from? As I see it the <þu:r> reference became taboo (cf.
the respective pronunciations of Sáddam vs Saddám in news during the
Gulf war), just as in High German the day of Woden became mid-week
instead. Missionaries and clergy would have pronounced <þu:r> as if
it were a suffix, hence <-Dur>.
>[Piotr:] Can you quote the relevant passage from the Thuringian
Chronicle? Does it really say what you say it says? Not that I'm
holding my breath. I don't believe a 15th century writer could have
had access to any reliable information about the origin of the
Thuringians.
[Torsten:]
Of course you don't. Here it is
"
Da funden sie die Thyrigitas
oder die Theuren Gotthen / Das ist ; die Thueringer
"
http://www.ikp.uni-bonn.de/dt/forsch/frnhd/255.html
seite 16: 18
>
> Piotr
Torsten