Re: [tied] Re: Wuz

At 3:36:08 PM on Thursday, July 15, 2004, Richard Wordingham
wrote:

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

>> At 7:00:29 AM on Thursday, July 15, 2004, tgpedersen
>> wrote:

>>> *va- > *vo- > *o- is common in Danish. Besides (w)ooze,
>>> do you know of other similar examples in English (esp.
>>> the *wo- > *o- part)?

>> Only in dialect. I don't know the geographical details,
>> but Scots had <oo>, <oull> 'wool' in the 16th century.

> Onions gives just five examples:

> 1. _ooze_ 'exudation, exude' < OE _wo:s_ 'juice, sap'.

> 2. _ooze_ 'mud, slime' < OE _wa:se_

> 3. _ood_ dialect form of _wood_

> 4. _ool_ dialect form of _wool_

> 5. _ooman_ dialect form of _woman_.

> Would you allow _oo_, dialect form of 'who'?

No, but I considered including <who>, with /hw-/ > /h-/, as
a borderline case between those noted above and the
<two>-type noted below.

> I suppose _two_ < OE twa: doesn't count - sporadic loss of
> /w/ in environment C_O: has been going for a long time -
> e.g. _c(w)o:m_ 'came' OE, _sword_, _so_ < OE _swa:_,
> occasional /kO:t/ for <quart>.

I'd not go quite so far as to say that they don't count: it
all looks like the same thing, but more strongly favored
after an initial consonant.

Brian