[tied] Re: aldric, luis, aldrin = etymology?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:

> On 04-10-27 06:14, he_who_must_not_be_named wrote:

> > 3. is it the same for kentish and low german? and anglian? if it

had a

> > cognate in west saxon, i guess it would be possible to have a
> > middle/new english version, right? -->auldric? :) serious help on

this

> > one.
>
> The historical roots of Modern Standard English(es) are more

Anglian

> (East Midland) than West Saxon. In other words, "standard"

(Æþelwoldian)

> Late West Saxon, despite its historical importance, is _not_ the
> direct ancestor of the modern standard varieties. That's why the
> standard forms of today are <sold, told, bold, old> rather

than "seald,

> teald" etc. (to rhyme with <field>); the modern vowel (/oU/ ~ /&U/)
> reflects Middle English /O:/, which in turn reflects OE /a:/ from
> Anglian /a/ regularly lengthened in this environment (before /ld/).

I think we'd get *A(u)ldritch /O:ldritS/. -ldr- certainly keeps some
vowels short, as in child /tSaild/ ~ children /tSildr&n/. _alder_ <
OE _alor_ supports my idea, but doesn't confirm it.

Richard.