Re[2]: [tied] Re: vulgar Latin?

At 1:36:55 PM on Thursday, May 1, 2003, Piotr Gasiorowski
wrote:

> It's clear that <w> was just a way of writing <vv>:
> sometimes the first half of "double V" counted as
> consonantal (= /w/) and the second as vocalic (= /u/),
> e.g. 'wood' could be spelt <wde> ("and springþ þe wde nu")
> beside <uud>, <wode>, <vode> and other variants.

Yep. Very common in <Wulf-> names, e.g., <Eudo Wluiet> 1199
from <Wulfgéat>, <Will. Wlwrith> 1242 from <Wulfríc>,
<Wluiua Walle> 1332 from <Wulfgifu>. My impression is that
it becomes very rare after the first third or so of the 14th
century, though, having been in decline for some time before
that, but I'm most familiar with onomastic source.

Brian