Re: Negation

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@...>
wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@> wrote:
> >
> > On 2008-12-08 00:52, Andrew Jarrette wrote:
> >
> > > So from the evidence of <la:werce>/<la:ferce> (early form
> <la:uricæ>)
> > > and <æ:fre> one can conclude that the change /-wr-/ > /-vr-/ is
> > > regular in Old English?
> >
> > No. There are perfectly normal comparatives like <gle:awra> from
> > <gle:aw>. Had i-umlaut remained productive in LOE, and had there
> been a
> > (semi)regular change of -wr- > -Br- > -vr-, one would expect the
> > occasional appearance of +<gly:fra> of some similar form. Another
> weak
> > point of Liberman's proposal is that a form deliberately created

by

> > literate clerics in the 10th century should have been

_immediately_

> > affected by complex morphophonological transformations obscuring
> its
> > etymology (surely one would expect some preliminary competition
> > involving forms like +<(n)a:wre> or +<(n)æ:wre> in OE texts

before

> > <(n)æ:fre> became generally accepted). All that can be reasonably
> > claimed is that <-wr-> ~ <-fr-> is not quite without precedent.
> That's
> > why I don't regard the older etymology as obsolete.
> >
> > Piotr
>
> claw
> O.E. clawu, from P.Gmc. *klawo, from PIE *g(e)l-eu- from base *gel-
> "to make round, clench." The verb is from O.E. clawian.
>
> Where it enters in this schema?
>
> Marius
>

More Exactly:

claw sb. OE. clawu (new formation on the obl. cases, the orig. nom.
being *cle:a, whence ME. and dial. clee) = OS. cla:uua, OHG. kla:wa
(G. klaue) :- WGmc. *kla:wo:

Hence claw vb. OE. clawian = MLG. kla:wen, OHG. kla:we:n

Marius