Re: [MTLR] RE: The Vocalic Theory (PIE *al-)

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

>
> On 2008-05-21 19:22, Rick McCallister wrote:
>
> > You occasionally hear shat and shatten but always in
> > humorous contexts. Shit is the standard past
> > participle.
> > Canterbury Tales has "shiten" --
> > And shame it is if a preest take keep,
> > a shiten shepherd and a clene sheep. (505-506)
>
> Had it developed regularly, it would be shite/+shote/+shitten now (<
> OE *sci:tan/*sc(e)a:t/*sciton/sciten, Class 1, like wri:tan, though
> only the p.p. -sciten is directly attested). Middle English
> generally preserved the expected reflexes. <Shite> is of course
> still common regionally, at least in the British Isles, and the
> pret./p.p. shit can also be regarded as historically "correct".

Hm. Danish has 'skiden' "dirty", (obsol., now 'beskidt') ODa. skidhen,
No. skitten;
DEO calls it the ppp. of skide, although the ppp. of that today is
'skidt'. It's not just a denominal adj., like 'rotten' (DEO calls
'rådden' a ppp. too, of a root PGmc *reut- "tear up, dig up", but does
the semantics fit?)? In the the transitive version of the Engl. verb,
shouldn't the shitten object, not the beshatten one be qualified with
the ppp-adj.?


Torsten