From: Brian M. Scott
Message: 29206
Date: 2004-01-07
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott"Yes, that's an old observation; E. Schwarz cites H. Ehmer
> <BMScott@...> wrote:
>> At 6:56:18 AM on Monday, January 5, 2004, tgpedersen
>> wrote:
>>> England is full of -tun place names. They are found on
>>> the continent too (very few in Scandinavia), especially
>>> in the area around Calais.
>> The English <-tu:n> names do not appear to belong to the
>> earliest layer of settlement names; in the earliest
>> records (to 731) <-ha:m> is the most common habitative
>> element, and there are just a handful of <-tu:n> names.
>> Cameron has suggested that <-tu:n> names were not being
>> formed in great numbers before the end of the 7th
>> century.
> Nielsen: "'Continental Old English' and s-Plurals in Old
> and Middle Dutch":
> "From a distributional point of view it is interesting
> that the -thun names are only attested south of the second
> Dunkirk marine transgression (+- 400 - +- 700) ... which
> provides us with a useful terminus ante quem: the -thun
> names must have originated before 700". If both arguments
> are right, that leaves a narrow window 650 - 700. Anything
> spectular take place at that time in the Anglo-Saxon
> colonisation?
> Another point: According to Udolph, -ing-ton names are
> found only in England and on the Litus Saxonicum (Pas de
> Calais).
> That would fit in with some kind of collective,That hardly answers the question.
> not personal settlement on the continental side.
>>> Udolph is very insistent that the place names (eg.
>>> -horst/-hurst) indicate that the Anglo-Saxon migration
>>> took place from the interior of Germany,
>> Why, given the evidence of Frisian?
> The place name evidence he offers seems solid enough.
> Which evidence does Frisian offer?Anglo-Frisian Brightening (fronting of low, back */a/ to