From: tgpedersen
Message: 33530
Date: 2004-07-15
> >>>>>> Künzel, Blok, & Verhoeff, Lexicon van nederlandseTsk-tsk.
> >>>>>> toponiemen tot 1200, have the citation <Philippus de
> >>>>>> Wasnare> 1200 [1305] and say: wrsch. onl. _hare_
> >>>>>> 'hoogte, heuvelrug' met bijv. nw. _wasn_ (< dativus
> >>>>>> singularis *_hwassan_) 'scherp' (vgl. oe. _hwass_).
>
> >>>>> Given Swedish vass 'reed(s)' (I think most Lexicon etc
> >>>>> writers wouldn't be aware that it existed),
>
> >>>> Seems a strange assumption; the word's in every
> >>>> Swedish-English bilingual that I own, in both directions,
> >>>> and is described as 'common'. (I'm not sure what you mean
> >>>> by 'Lexicon etc writers'; all three authors are serious
> >>>> toponymists.)
>
> >>> That may be so. It seems an obvious choice, so I just
> >>> puzzled it wasn't discussed or even mentioned. Do you have
> >>> a better explanation of why that is so?
>
> >> To the best of my knowledge the word is completely isolated
> >> even within N.Gmc., unless one assumes that it belongs with
> >> <vada> 'to wade', which is already pretty conjectural and
> >> also requires a semantic development that could not
> >> reasonably be assumed elsewhere.
>
> > Ordbog over det danske Sprog has a 'vasse' "wade", fig.
> > "move clumsily, as if wading through water", dialectal and
> > loaned from Norwegian. There goes your 'conjectural'.
>
> No. 'Conjectural' here referred to the proposed
> relationship, not to the existence of the word. I already
> knew about Norwegian <vasse> 'to wade'; its existence is the
> only reason even to consider the possibility of a
> relationship in the first place.
> > Second, if we assume the root is Nordwestblock,Good for you; if you were, you'd have to read a lot of stuff in
>
> I'm not likely to; I'm not persuaded that the term is
> meaningful.
>