Re: pan-

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel J. Milton" <dmilt1896@...>
wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From Meillet's Latin Etymological Dictionary
> >
> > 'panna' "pan" is not from 'patina'
> >
> > loaned into
> > OHG pfanna
> > Western French 'pan', 'pon' "vessel, container"
> > Portuguese 'panela'
> > Britannic 'pann' "bowl, cup"
> >
> > from my failing memory:
> > Britanic place names 'pen-' "head" ?
> >
> > That this 'vocalisme a, mot populaire' (ie. loanword) word should
> be
> > loaned into Germanic, Celtic and Romance from Latin is not the
> only
> > viable possibility (ie. Nordwestblock).
> >
> > Torsten
> **********
> I don't have Meillet's dictionary, but find in Buck's "Synonyms".
> Greek 'patane' "flat dish" (cf. 'petannumi' "spread out")-->
> Latin 'patina' --> MLat. 'panna' --> OEng. 'panne' --> MEng 'pan'.
> American Heritage Dictionary (which is more scrupulous about
> flagging unattested forms)has the OEng. "from WGermanic *panna,
> probably from Vulgar Latin *patna from Latin 'patina'.
> Sounds entirely reasonable to me. What's the objection?

I haven't rechecked Meillet, but I found the same argument in Hans
Kuhn: Latin 'panna' is documented so early (1st century CE) that it
is difficult to believe that it derives from *patna (which is
undocumented). The Romance developments that should take care of that
derivation took place much later. That would mean that 'panna' is
another 'vocalisme a, mot populaire' with a badly matching cognate in
Germanic which would make bette sense as a Nordwestblock relic word.


Torsten