From: george knysh
Message: 59087
Date: 2008-06-06
--- On Fri, 6/6/08, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
--- In cybalist@... s.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@... > wrote:
>
> At 7:39:10 PM on Thursday, June 5, 2008, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@... s.com, "Brian M. Scott"
> > <BMScott@> wrote:
>
> >> The spelling of Latin <butyrum> with <y> is a very good
> >> indication that it came from Greek.
>
> > Not quite, cf the Latin spelling lacryma.
>
> This makes no sense, unless you incorrectly imagine that 'a
> very good indication' is synonymous with 'ironclad proof'.
> (Though I shouldn't mind knowing how early the medieval
> spelling with <y> actually occurs.)
The spelling with <y> is an indication that whoever spelled the word
thought it came from Greek, like you do.
Torsten
****GK: I can at least vouch for the fact that by the 13th century and probably earlier (I've not studied much in these earlier manuscripts) there was no clearcut rule or assumption about the use of "y" or "i" in any position, though final "y's" were admittedly rare. "Hieronymus"--"Hyeronimus"--"Isaias"---"Ysaias"---"dialogus"---"dyalogus---"Eli"---"Ely"--- etc. etc. etc.