Re: [tied] Re: An odd etymology

At 4:29:06 AM on Wednesday, May 19, 2004, tgpedersen wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott"
> <BMScott@...> wrote:

>> At 7:09:21 AM on Tuesday, May 18, 2004, tgpedersen wrote:

>>> One more thing about Greek <pelekus> "axe" etc: English
>>> has <pole-axe>, which has nothing to do with a pole.

>> Indeed; it's a 'head-axe' (<poll> 'crown of the head').

> And my beef is with semantics: what would one need a 'head
> axe' for?

Opening heads, perhaps to let in some sense. Alternatively,
the term may originally have meant an axe with a particular
kind of head.

>>> Danish has <bol-økse>, which has little to do with <bol>
>>> "tree trunk".

Actually, now that I think about it, it may. It appears to
reflect ON <bolöx> 'a poleaxe, a wood-axe', and I see no
obvious objection to the notion that <bolöx> contains <bolr>
'the boll or trunk of a tree'.

>> Middle Danish had <polöxe>, according to the OED, from MLG
>> <polexe>. The 'head' word appears to exist (or have
>> existed) at least in English, Dutch, Low German, Swedish
>> (dialect), and Danish (<puld>) [OED s.v. <poll>].

> Danish <puld> is used of hats (that part which isn't the
> brim). Did hatters need special axes?

The <poll> word seems to have referred specifically to the
crown of the head; from there to 'crown of a hat' is a
perfectly natural development.

>>> Imitating Vennemann's method, I think I'll propose that
>>> these two words are folk etymology reinterpretations of
>>> the original, corresponding to <pelekus> etc.

>> That would require at least two stages of folk
>> etymologizing.

> Not if the original vacillated between *p-l-/*bh-l-,
> Nordwestblock etc *p-l-/*b-l-

Irrelevant. If the word in some form were originally simply
'axe', 'poll-axe' is one folk etymology, and 'pole-axe' is a
second. And if the <p-> and <b-> axe words are in origin
the same, 'boll-axe' is yet a third folk etymology.

Brian