Re: Nordwestblock, Germani, and Grimm's law

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

>> At 5:50:43 AM on Tuesday, January 26, 2010, Torsten wrote:

>> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, johnvertical@ wrote:

>> [...]

>> >>> The direction "side" > "limb" is shown in the metaphor
>> >>> "wing" used in an attacking army (cf. Latin 'ala',
>> >>> German 'Flügel').

>> >> That's still "limb" > "side" too. "Wing" originally means
>> >> "limb" and its meaning is extended to the side of an
>> >> army.

>> > 'Wing' has the most diverse explanation in DEO, de Vries
>> > and Skeat.

>> Whatever the etymology of the word, you still haven't given
>> an example of 'side' > 'limb'.

> But the sense I derive it from is not just "side", but "a body (of people)
> on the side", and seeing society (= its army) in the image of a body with
> organs is pretty common,

So? This is still 'limb' > X, not X > 'limb'.

[...]

>> (The sources readily available to me all derive it, if at all, from
>> *h2weh1- 'to blow'.)

> So does de Vries,

I know; I own a copy.

[...]

> I'm not impressed by the "blow" etymology, and I suspect you aren't
> either.

I'd keep my eyes open for a better, but I'm certainly not about to
dismiss it out of hand: it seems to work formally, and the semantics
aren't impossible.

> Obviously the "on the side" sense was there from the beginning in
> ON (cf. the "cabin" sense).

No, it's not obvious. Cleasby & Vígfusson have early citations for
the 'wing' sense, but for 'wing of a building' and 'side cloth on an
altar' they have only 14th century citations, from Dipl. Norv. and
Björgynjar Kálfskinn.

[...]

>> > The basic distinction in military disciple, as manifested
>> > in the command language of parades is between being
>> > directly subordinated to the will of a superior, and being
>> > "on your own time" (within limits, of course). The
>> > mode-changing commands are 'Attention' and 'At ease'. For
>> > an army, getting through the landscape in a single file is
>> > done on your own time, so to speak, like the legions of
>> > Varus did at Kalkriese. Calling that formation, or rather
>> > non-formation "an arrangement of soldiers" is therefore
>> > misleading. It is, if anything, a lack of arrangement.

>> I think that you'll have a hard time persuading anyone who's
>> actually served.

> I did.

So did I, and I stand by what I wrote.

[...]

> I was trying to match John's example. Will 'purple'
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple
> meet your standards?

Not really: purple is hardly a basic color.

>> >> I don't see you even trying to explain there how a single
>> >> *L could yield all of *g *gl *dVl *d *l etc.

>> > I assume you already know that the /L/ is meant to denote
>> > an unvoiced /l/. That's a rather rare phoneme, and tends
>> > to get substituted with exactly those combination when
>> > words containing it are loaned. Eg. the Welsh placename
>> > Llanberis is rendered in English as /klanberis/,
>> > /hlanberis/ or /lanberis/.

>> After simple <l(l)>, the most common English attempts to
>> represent the Welsh sound are probably <fl> and <thl>. The
>> <Fl> forms have given rise to well-known English surnames,
>> <Flewelling> (and variants) and <Floyd> (ditto), from
>> <Llywelyn> and <Llwyd>, respectively.

> Thank you for providing further examples of the rendition in English of
> that Welsh sound.

With the exception of the obvious *L > *l, Welsh > English has
given you evidence for *none* of the substitutions listed above.

Brian