--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...> wrote:
>
> At 3:12:52 PM on Monday, August 14, 2006, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Now did NWBlock have a/o: ablaut?
> > Possible evidence:
> > English hook, Dutch hoek, German Haken
> > English hood, Dutch hoed, German Hut, English hat
> > (connected by Kuhn to Latin cassis "helmet",
> > further Chatti, Hessen, examples of -tt-/-ss-).
>
> > Then I stumbled over some Friesian strong verbs
> > (and what could be more NWBlock than Friesian):
> > pres. drank-, pret. droonk-
>
> Gerhard Köbler gives the OFr verb as <drinka>, a Class III
> strong verb (e/i, a, u, u). He gives the NFr verb as
> <drincken>, Saterlandish <drinca>. For /a/ in the present
> you want Goth. <dragkjan> 'to give to drink', ON <drekkja>
> 'to submerge, to drown', OE <drencan> (both senses), OFr
> <drentza> 'to drown', but of course this is a weak verb.
Took some time, but I found it again, fortunately ...
http://www.verbix.com/documents/frisian.htm
"
Irregular verbs
Infinitive: drank
Past participle: dronken
Present Past
1sg drank droonk
2sg drankst droonkst
3sg drankt droonkt
pl drank droonk
"
I'd have to use Kuhn's argument that these late forms
are 'popular', thus original, and have been there all
the time in a lower sociolect.
In the meanwhile I realized that class VI exists in
Gothic too, which can't have had much contact with
NWBlock. Therefore, perhaps, they reflect another
substrate language that was present in the genesis
of the Germanic language. Bastarnian? Przeworsk?
Are there examples of PIE en -> Germanic an and
PIE on -> Germanic o:n?
It's interesting BTW that ON taka belongs to
class VI since a stem *T-T in Germanic can't be
directly from PIE (where it would be **D-D,
violating root constraints).
Also, Gothic ana-praggan (with initial p-!, and
Danish prange, prakke) belongs to the reduplicating
class VIIa with no ablaut. Perhaps that class is also
a repository for non-Germanic roots?)
Torsten