Re: OE *picga

From: tgpedersen
Message: 16535
Date: 2002-10-28

--- In cybalist@..., "Richard Wordingham" <richard.wordingham@...>
> --- In cybalist@..., Piotr Gasiorowski <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Richard Wordingham
> > To: cybalist@...
> > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 2:14 PM
> > Subject: [tied] Re: OE *picga
> >
> > It's free variation, as far as I can see, just like there being
> orthographic contrast between /k/ and /tS/ in Old English.
> Except before back vowels.
> > Did you say Hogg? All right, he will testify. Here is what
> Hogg says in _A Grammar of Old English [Vol.1: Phonology]_ (1992,
> Oxford: Blackwell):
> >
> > "Naturally [gg], which was undoubtedly a geminate stop, could
> arise by processes other than WGmc gemination, since [gg] by that
> process develops as /dZ/. The problem is that the words which
> [gg] are not only of dubious etymology but are also members of a
> clear semantic set, largely animal pet-names, such as
_docga_ 'dog',
> _frogga_ 'frog', *_picga_ 'pig', *_stagga_ 'stag' [here the scribal
> variation is Hocg's... sorry, Hogg's own], _sugga_ 'sparrow',
> _wicga_ 'earwig'. As such, the status of [gg] is rather less clear
> than it might be, since it would seem to have some phonaesthetic
> force..."
> >
> > He also notes that <sceacga> is possibly a borrowing from ON
> (though one wonders why we have <shag> rather than +<skag> then).
> And the ON form with a geminate is skeggr 'beard', so the vowel
> doesn't fit either.
> > > Is the expressive gemination of voiced consonants OE, Germanic
> Scandinavian (cf Swedish sugga 'sow')? Moreover, what is being
> geminated in Frogga & co? <-gga>/<-cga> looks like a word-
> > classifying suffix, akin to '-er' in German animal words.
> >
> > It's OE in these words, but there are similar tendencies
> Germanic (plus analogies in Greek, Latin and Celtic). To form a
> hypocorism, take a word and truncate it (if you think it's too
> leaving only the initial syllable and the onset of the second; you
> may geminate the latter, and if you manipulate its phonation in the
> process, or mutilate what used to be a cluster, nobody will mind;
> finally, add weak-noun inflections. "What is your name, boy?
> Wulfhere? That sounds too serious; we shall call you Wuffa." The
> operation of the process is easy to see in <frox, frosc> ->
> I can see *frocca > dialect 'frock' (cited in Falk & Torp, who
> propose a different derivation), but do you have examples of the
> mangled onset being more marked? The other forms still seem to
> a <-cga> suffix, unless one can derive 'wicga' from something like
> <wagian> = 'totter', 'sway' (>? 'wag') or an unattested ancestor
> of 'wiggle'.
> > statistically correct
> That's a good way of saying wrong but usually good enough!
> Richard.

from EIEC:

vigg "horse" Old Norse
wicg "horse" Old English

but it's probably not an earhorse.