From: tgpedersen
Message: 29208
Date: 2004-01-07
> At 5:52:53 AM on Tuesday, January 6, 2004, tgpedersen wrote:Udolph in general only takes place name evidence into consideration.
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott"
> > <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).
>
> Yes, that's an old observation; E. Schwarz cites H. Ehmer
> from 1937, and for all I know it might be older still.
>
> > That would fit in with some kind of collective,
> > 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.
>
> That hardly answers the question.
>It all adds up then, Angles, Saxons and Jutes (ie Nordwestblock
> > Which evidence does Frisian offer?
>
> Anglo-Frisian Brightening (fronting of low, back */a/ to
> [æ] except before nasals) and raising of */a:/ to /o:/
> before nasals (OE, OFris <mo:na> vs. OS, OHG <ma:no> and ON
> <máni>) come to mind. Oh, and perhaps palatalization of
> velars before front vowels (OE <cirice> 'church', OFris
> <tsierka>, <tsiurk> vs. OS <kirika>, OHG <chirihha>, ON
> <kirkja>; OE <gieldan> 'to yield', OFris <ielda> vs. OS
> <geldan>, OHG <geltan>, ON <gjalda>), though that's not
> exactly an uncommon change.
>
> There's not much doubt that the way to England must have
> included a significant stay in Frisian territory.
>