--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "A." <xthanex@...> wrote:
>
> Hey all,
> A quick two questions that hopefully someone knows the answer to:
>
> 1) How does PGmc *Tiwaz -> OE Tig ?
> "Tiges" is used in the OE Martyrology to refer to Mars, whereas in the
> 7th c Kentish Epinal (or Epinal-Erfurt) Gloss, the term for Mars
> is "tiig".
> Anyway, I assume *Tiwaz -> Tiw -- but then I cannot grasp the shift
> from W-to-G. Any ideas?
>
On OE Tig here's what A. Campbell ("An Old English Grammar") says:
"In absolute finality [w] dropped in West Gmc after <i:> and hence in
a few words in <-i:wa-> [in PGmc] there is a variation between final
<i:> (which may be written <ig>, $$271), <i:o>, <e:o> (with
restoration of <w> from inflected forms, and develoopment of <iw> to
<i:o>, <e:o>) and <i:w> (with late restoration and retention of <w>).
Hence <gi:g, gi:w> vulture, <briig, bri:w> porridge, <sli:, sli:w>
mullet, <Tiig, Ti:wes->, a heathen god. The forms in <i:(g)> are the
oldest, being mainly recorded in early glossaries; <-i:g> is
transferred to an inflected form in <Ti:ges>. The development <e:o>
with addition of <w> from inflected forms occurs in <sle:ow>; <e:o> is
transferred to an inflected form in <ge:owes>. The variation of <i:g>
with <i:w, i:ow> in these words caused a form <gli:g, gli:ges> to
arise beside <gli:w, gli:ow> mirth [> ModEng <glee>] ($$120.2), and
southern place-names suggest that *<ni:ge> existed beside <ni:we>, new
(AB xxviii. 295)."
Note that OE <g> had both velar varieties ([g] initial and after [N],
[G] medially otherwise (which > [x] finally)) and palatal varieties
([j]; *[J](voiced palatal plosive)>[dZ] after [n]). The palatal
varieties arose from PGmc *g (plosive and fricative) before OE front
vowels, and merged in pronunciation with PGmc *j (as in *jukam, OE
<geoc> (> <yoke>)). So <ig> was a convenient grapheme for [i:] or
[i(:)j] based on the palatal pronunciation of <g>.
>
> 2) Old Norse gives the words "tiggi" and "tyggi" to mean king or
> leader, and the term "tiginn" to mean high rank or noble (based on both
> Cleasby-Vigfusson's and Zoega's dictionaries).
> Is there any way these could be related to OE Tig or is it simply an
> issue of them being homophones?
>
> As always, I am in your debt,
> -Aydan
>
I don't know the etymology of ON "tiggi"/"tyggi" but they cannot be
from *Ti:waz, which is what OE Tig is from. "tiggi" would most likely
be from *tigjen (n-stem), less likely *tijjen or *tiggen, and "tyggi"
would most likely be from *tugjen, *tewwen, *tewwjam, or *tewwjen,
less likely *tuggjam or *tuggjen.
I also don't know the etymology of ON "tiginn" but it looks to have
the form of a past participle of ON <tjá> "to show, point, inform,
notify, communicate", whether it really is or not. In any case, it
must go back to a PGmc form *tigenaz or *tiginaz, and not *Ti:waz, and
hence is not related to OE Tig.
Andrew