Re: Vanir,etc.

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Marco Moretti"
<marcomoretti69@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>

wrote:

> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Marco Moretti"
> > <marcomoretti69@...> wrote:
> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >But what the pre-IE Germanic root wani-
> > > > > meant? I think it was a word for "bright", probably
> > also "divine".
> > > > > If I'm not wrong there is an isolated Anglo-Saxon
> > > > > word, /wanum/ "bright" that is formed from the same root.
> > > >
> > > > And? You have a kingdom of Vani around the corner from the
> > homeland
> > > > of the As people. They don't come much better than that.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I remember you that Proto-Germanic has /*ansuz/, "a k. of

divine

> or
> > > semi-divine being". So we cannot match it with a form /as/ that
> > > almost certainly had no ancient nasal at all. It is chance
> > > resemblance.
> > >
> >
> > Which is a reconstruction. I think the Germanic forms with -n-

are

> a
> > hypercorrection.
>
> Based on what? Reflex of the nasal consonant are clearly

discernible

> in Old Norse. We have a gloss explaining the Gothic term /ansis/

(or

> better /*anseis/) as a word meaning "hero, semi-divine being".
> How do you account for Old Norse close /a:/ vowel in /a:ss/ written
> also as /o:/ if you don't admit an old nasal? You should study some
> Germanic philology.
>

So I move the hypercorrection back to PGmc. How's that for you?

Torsten