Re: Tudrus

At 4:52:47 AM on Saturday, January 15, 2011, Torsten wrote:

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

[...]

>> In short, there is no reason to see -RĪK as a suffix and
>> every reason to see it as the deuterothematic counterpart of
>> the prototheme RĪK-.

> Actually, I think I ended up claiming that the name
> Theodoric should be analyzed as Theodor-ik-, not
> Theodor-rīk-. Quote from Wexler:
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/67011
> 'The Greek name means 'gift of God' and is synonymous with
> He nətān`el, nətān-jāh(ū). See also OGY (He) *tə´adrīx
> (corrected from tə´azrīx - with vocalization in the text:
> Würzburg 1298);209 in German Latin texts the Jewish name
> appears as Thiderich (Köln, mid-12th c), Tidericus
> (1230).'

> So, are you now going to maintain that the Theodor and
> Theodoric might have been seen as one in daily use, but
> they were of different origin?

Certainly. Similarly, <Simund> (from ON <Sigmundr>) and
<Simon> were being conflated as early as Domesday Book.

> It might seem surprising that I should use a putative
> Greek substrate in the German dialect of Ashkenazi Jews as
> evidence that Snorri might have been right about the Odin
> invasion, [...]

This fantasy has been ruled off-topic.

> The only time the Elbe was a major political boundary was
> in the few decades up to the Clades Variana in 9 CE where
> the land south and west of the Elbe was part of the Roman
> Empire. A scenario in which Yiddish-speakers arrived in
> that area from the east before that time, taking up
> contact with Latin-speakers in that short period, would
> not be in disagreement with the above facts.

Yiddish speakers 2000 years ago is absurd fantasy.

Brian