Re: Identity of the 'language of geminates'

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...> wrote:

>
> At 3:52:34 AM on Friday, October 17, 2008, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott"
> > <BMScott@> wrote:
>
> >> At 11:53:32 AM on Thursday, October 16, 2008, tgpedersen
> >> wrote:
>
> >> [...]
>
> >>> The name of the Norican king, Vocio/Voccio/VOKK(on
> >>> coins) shows that the language of Noricum had geminates.
> >>> And =? *Wonk-, related to Vang-ijo-, note one of Odin's
> >>> names is Vak-r ?
>
> >> <Vakr> 'wakeful, watchful, alert' hardly needs further
> >> explanation as a byname of Óðinn. Note also the Reistad
> >> runestone with its <ek wakraR> 'I Vakr'; more generally,
> >> *wakra- is a well-attested Gmc. onomastic element, found
> >> in all branches.
>
> > It occurs in Grimnismál:
>
> [...]
>
> > and in Gylfaginning
>
> [...]
>
> > Then said Gangleri: "Exceeding many names have ye given
> > him; and, by my faith, it must indeed be a goodly wit that
> > knows all the lore and the examples of what chances have
> > brought about each of these names." Then Hárr made answer:
> > "It is truly a vast sum of knowledge to gather together
> > and set forth fittingly. But it is briefest to tell thee
> > that most of his names have been given him by reason of
> > this chance: there being so many branches of tongues in
> > the world, all peoples believed that it was needful for
> > them to turn his name into their own tongue, by which they
> > might the better invoke him and entreat him on their own
> > behalf. But some occasions for these names arose in his
> > wanderings; and that matter is recorded in tales. Nor
> > canst thou ever be called a wise man if thou shalt not be
> > able to tell of those great events."'
>
> I know. I've read it. In the (normalized) original.
> Here's the full list of names from section 20 of
> Gylfaginning; I've used <ö> for <o,>.
>
> Allföðr, Valföðr, Hangaguð, Haptaguð, Farmaguð.
>
> Grímr, Gangleri, Herian, Hiálmberi, Þekkr, Þriði, Þuðr,
> Uðr, Helblindi, Hár, Saðr, Svipall, Sanngetall, Herteitr,
> Hnikarr, Bileygr, Báleygr, Bölverkr, Fiölnir, Grímnir,
> Glapsviðr, Fiölsviðr, Siðhöttr, Siðskeggr, Sigföðr,
> Hnikuðr, Allföðr, Atríðr, Farmatýr, Óski, Ómi, Iafnhár,
> Biflindi, Göndlir, Hárbarðr, Sviðurr, Sviðrir, Ialkr,
> Kialarr, Viðurr, Þrór, Yggr, Þundr, Vakr, Skilvingr,
> Váfuðr, Hroptatýr, Gautr, Veratýr.
>
> > which means it is something other peoples call him. Why do
> > you then insist on finding an etymology for the name in
> > ON?
>
> Because despite that passage, a majority of the names are
> fairly readily interpretable in ON, and it's the obvious
> first place to look. Similarly, I have no reason to think
> that the explanation isn't Snorri's (or someone's) invention
> after the fact.

You've misunderstood scientific method: when someone introduces a new
idea (in casu that Snorri (or someone) wasn't lying) then you either
show that it is false or consider it (temporarily) to be possible. You
constant phrase 'I have no reason to believe it' (other than what
you've been told) shows that your belief system is theological, it is
based on faith alone, and any alternative is met with a 'vade retro ...'.

> > If all the names had been somehow translated into ON,
> > their etymology from ON would have been transparent, but
> > for most of them, it is opaque.
>
> A majority are interpretable in ON, whatever their true
> etymologies may be.

Exactly. Even as kennings they sound strained. One obvious possibility
is that they are folk etymologies of something else.

> The obvious conclusion is that most of them probably *are* ON.

Why is that an 'obvious conclusion' one sentence after you admitted
that they may have another 'true' etymology? And even then, there is a
remainder.

> In the case of <Vakr> one has to be wilfully blind to ignore the
> obvious source, and one has to have an extremely strong case in
> order to reject it; you have no real case at all.

Faith again; I'm not rejecting anything, I'm saying there is an
alternative possibility which should be considered. You are the one
who wants to reject possible etymologies, not me.


Torsten