From: dgkilday57
Message: 66883
Date: 2010-11-13
>This word deserves further study. I am not pleased with the onomatopoeic explanation (in English or French) given by some dictionaries.
> ________________________________
> From: dgkilday57 <dgkilday57@...>
> To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sat, November 6, 2010 1:47:54 PM
> Subject: [tied] Re: Optional Soundlaws (was: IE *aidh- > *aus-tr- 'hot, warm
> (wind)')
>
> [...]
>
> Webster's International, Century, WNWD, and AHD give /huwp/ as the first
> pronunciation of <hoop>, /hUp/ as the second (reversed, apparently by error,
> perhaps following <hoof>, in M-W's 7th Collegiate). The only other /Up/-auslaut
> words cited in M-W's rhyming dictionary are <coop> and <whoop>, for which /kuwp/
> and /h(w)uwp/ are cited first, /kUp/ and /h(w)Up/ second. No OE form is given
> for <whoop>, so we cannot use it here. But since hoops are used in making
> barrels, and thus a cooper is a hooper, it seems plausible that the MLG
> trade-words <ku:pe> 'cask, barrel', <ku:per> 'barrelwright' (ME <cupe>,
> <couper>, <cowper>) influenced the vocalism of ME <hoop>, <hopere> in most
> dialects, with the opposite influence in a few others. Thus rather than
> expected /hUp/ and /kuwp/ we find mostly /huwp/ and /kuwp/, sometimes /hUp/ and
> /kUp/. Similarly, obsolete MnE <boot> 'remedy, profit, benefit' (fossilized in
> the phrase <to boot> 'in addition, besides') presents a problem against OE
> <bo:t>. Probably the vowel of ME <bote>, <boote> was influenced by
> folk-etymological association with MLG <bu:te> 'exchange, plunder, booty'.
> ***R I've heard <whoop> as both /hwuwp/ (my pronunciation) and as /hwUp/
> (Southern US, Appalachian, rural Midwest). <Whoop-ass> , however, is invariably
> /hwUp?aes/, perhaps given its Southern US origins. <whoop-ti-do> also has /U/
> but I've heard it all over the US. <Whup>, regional past tense of <whip> is also
> /whUp/ as in "I'ma whup yo' ass."
> More challenging is <fluke>, which of course one expects to rhyme with <book>,The OED does cite an obsolete dialectal <fluck> as a variant. Presumably this had /V/ like the F-word, and it suggests a Late OE compound *flo:cfisc created to distinguish 'flounder' from the other senses of <flo:c>. This would have regularly yielded MnE *fluckfish, and back-formation of <fluck> would follow as effortlessly as <cod> from <codfish>. But I doubt that the F-word would have shifted <fluck> to <fluke>. Instead I suspect that if <fluck> had survived in general use, it would have become, like <fudge>, an acceptable substitute for the F-word. One could be addressed as *Fluckface and it would mean literally 'Flatface' or 'Flounderface', mildly demeaning perhaps, but not obscene.
> <cook>, and <took>. As a long-stemmed OE neuter, the nom./acc. pl. is identical
> to the sg. <flo:c>. Thus it sticks out like a sore thumb in the enumeration of
> sea-fish (in the acc. pl.) caught by the fisherman in Aelfric's Colloquium. The
> only other long nt. pl. in the list is <mereswi:n> (MS. -swyn) 'porpoises', a
> transparent cpd. of 'swine', recognized then and now as a collective. This
> morphological FLUKE could have engendered a wk. masc. *flo:ca as a substitute
> for the st. nt. <flo:c> in popular speech. If <fluke> indeed continues *flo:ca,
> its vocalism is as regular as <food> from <fo:da> and <rood> from *ro:de. (I am
> aware that this explanation looks forced, but it is the only one that I could
> devise.)
> ***Perhaps /flUk/ sounds too much like another F-word
> And <bough> remains problematic. I will have to examine reflexes of OE -o:h andThanks. I have never heard anything but /baw/.
> -o:g later; there are several complications.
> ***R I say /baw/ but I've heard New Yorkers say /bow/