--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel J. Milton" <dmilt1896@...>
wrote:
On german "Ziegel" vs. (Austrian German) "Tegel":
> I presume the two words are equivalent, but
> (getting around to a bit of linguistics finally) does it make sense
> that it's the Austrian that escaped the Second Sound Shift?
I vaguely remember the following. When Roman rule was discontinued in
Noricum (in the final quarter of the fifth century), a Latin-speaking
population must have stayed behind because a Romance dialect is
reported in or near Salzburg at a fairly late medieval stage. Hence it
is not excluded on principle that "tegel" is a post-consonant shift
loan from those speakers of Romance. Willi Mayerthaler devoted some
attention to the subject some twenty years ago in articles that struck
me (watching from the sidelines in complete innocence) as knowledgeable
and not obviously misguided or over the top despite the tone, which was
clearly intended to provoke his opponents. He payed particular
attention to items that should have undergone the High German Consonant
shift but appear not to have done so. So this may provide an
explanation.
Best.
Willem