Re: Schöffe I

From: t0lgsoo1
Message: 67311
Date: 2011-04-04

>You don't examine in order to get a conclusion every scoopful of
>water you bail out of you boat or scoop out of your barrel or ever
>scapulaful of half-rotten wood you scapula out of your logboat.

Thus is the German language, since "vox populi, vox Dei".
The Diutisk folk has opted for that, so there's nothing we can
do about it.

>It is a singularly unhelpful metaphor.

Jedes Volk schöpft aus dem Vollen nach Gutdünken. I.e., peoples
never ask linguists whenever they invent vocabulary and idiomatic

>I think de Vries goes overboard here, anyway this does demonstrate
>that the root underlying <smith> does not in itself imply that the
>material worked on is a metal, actually the facts seem to point at
>something more slushy, like plaster.

schmieren < ahd. smirwen
Schmer (e.g. in Schmerbauch) < ahd. smero "Fett", zu idg. *smer-

schmeißen < mhd. smizen "streichen, schmieren; schlagen" < ahd.
(bi)smizan "beflecken", engl. smite "schlagen", got. bismeitan
"bestreichen", gasmeitan "aufstreichen", Grundbedeutung "streichen",
zu idg. *smeid-; zu *sme(i) "schmieren, drüberstreichen", vermutl.
verwandt mit Schminke, schmeicheln.

[NB streichen also means "to hit, strike", Streich "hit, blow,
thrust; e.g. Schwertstreich; Staatstreich "coup d'êtat".)

Schmied < ahd. smid, got. aiza-smiDa "Erzschmied", zu idg. *smei-,
*sm&i, *smi- "schnitzen"

>(cf. also Da.
>smitte n. "contagion",
>smitte v. "infect",
>smitsom "contagious",
>besmitte "desecrate";

cf. German beschmutzen

(BTW, in Suebian and Alemanian German, Schmutz also means
"fat, grease" = Fett, Schmer, Schmalz)

>Only in the sense that he is a divider, separating the good from
>the bad, cf. <schicht> "layer", and so is a Schöpfer "creator";
>he takes out what is not supposed to be there. They discriminate >bad/unneeded/unwanted from good/needed/wanted.

It seems that only the verb (ver)schaffen pushes the judge
into the vicinity of the schaff-/scheff-/schöpf-/schopp-/schupp-
family. Otherwise, his main deeds are concentrated in the
verb richten (from the rect- family, cf. correct, rectitude,
direct); also the name of his profession: Richter (deverbal).
Thus, only the Schöffe remains übrig.

>But the Freischöffe of the

Oh, das Femegericht. But it is quite "recent" (the oldest
attestation: the 13th century). Indeed, the Schöffen justices had
more power. But even today, a Schöffe is a so-called "Laienrichter".

AFA the variants of the word are concerned, take into consideration
the older forms: Schöppe and Saupe (the latter esp. in East

geschworener Schöppe

>The Freischöffe is a free agent, and I suspect his subordination
>is a later thing.

That's correct. But even in much earlier (medieval) times, the
village Schöffe = Schöppe, was an assistant/councilor/counsel
assisting the... Dorfschulze (Dorfschultheiß). Usually, a
peasant invested by the liege lord of the area.

[I'd rather investigate whether there is the possibility for
Schöppe/Saupe/Schöffe to have been influenced or to have
been borrowed from a neighboring Slavic language in the East,
župan. In East Germany there are many people with last names
derived from this Slavic word: Suppan, Zschuppan, Zuppan,
and (I assume) Zschöppe, Tschöppe etc.]

The community called župa comprised several villages in the
incipient medieval times. In certain political environments and
epochs and geographical areas, a zhupan had indeed the power
and prerogatives of a judge! And both the Frankish empire and
the German empire neighbored as well as "agglutinated" areas
where this notion/rank zhupan was ubiquitous (so much so that
in certain areas of German native-speakers, i.e. East-Germany
and Austria, there are many people having last names derived
from the Slavic Zhupan). NB: in German there is no sound
for ž, so it is pronounced voiceless "sch" (Schupan, Schuppan).
(cf. pleasure, measure pronounced by German-speakers
Plescher, Mescher)

>Yup. 'Schichten'.

Your assumption schichten must be a Sackgasse, a false assumption.
There ain't no hint to connect Schöppe/Saupe/Schöffe with it.
The origin of Schöffe must be different (either schöpfen +
schaffen or something else).

>>E.g. in everyday's idiomatic usage: "Indem er auf diese Weise
>>Recht verschafft, erschafft er eine neue Situation: Durch diesen
>>Präzedenzfall können nunmehr die Freischaffenden von dieser
>>Steuer befreit werden. Das schafft der Richter, ohne Gesetzes-
>>schöpfer zu sein. Er schöpft aber aus dem Vollen. Die Anwälte
>>der Gegenseite behaupten trotzdem, dass die Rechtsmittel noch
>>nicht ausgeschöpft seien. Die Kläger wollten sich nicht äußern,
>>sie sagten lediglich, sie gingen nach Hause, sie seien schon
> Yes. And? Most of those were everyday uses.

The same words embedded in different semantic and flexionary
contexts have slightly or completely different meanings. These
everyday's lingo examples show how... schöpferisch (creative)
one can get by using esp. schöpfen and nouns, adj., adv. based
on schöpf-.

This is important, since your basic scepticism refers to the
idea schöpfen, because you rather expect something like
"sculpting, cutting (off), excavating" to have been the initial

>>Especially in the case of szép (and
>>other [Sep-] Uralic words that also mean "beautiful, pretty").
>None of them occur in his three examples.

In your initial list with Uralic and Turkic words, there were
some Uralic examples of <shepa> with the same meaning ("beautiful")
as in Hungarian. Esp. in Chuvash. Whereupon I posted the info
with the Bashkir tribes Yurmatu and Yeney.

>>It is relevant, since your initial idea revolves around the
>>meanings "wright, smith = creator", while you reject, for German,
>>the other idea "Wasser schöpfen".
>Which is irrelevant.

What is irrelevant? The connection smith<->Schöffe (Laienrichter)?
Today, you even pointed out that a smith, initially, also used
wood, not only metals.

>The reason that passage is there is that I cited the entire
>entry for *śeppä "geschickt" in UEW. I cited it for no other reason.

And what's the final conclusion? Is this *sheppa father/mother
to Uralic shepa/szép "beautiful"?

>The Uralic people was a forest people, and for such a people
>forest skills are important. The Hungarians did of course
>behave more Turkic-/Iranian-like.

It's not matter of behavioral, but of the origin of the vocabulary.
Indeed, Hungarian has a certain important percentage of main
words of Iranian (incl. Alanian) and North-Turkic origin, along
with the Uralic part and the Slavic part of the old vocabulary.
For example the above mentioned zhupan also existed up to the
18th century, or so, in kingdom Hungary as well: adapted as
ispán ['iSpa:n] "chief of a county", in Hung. ispánság was the
equivalent of the comitatus. Translated into german: Gespan and

But the words for wood, forest and the like sound completely
different although many of them are also Uralic (e.g. fa
"wood (lignum)" and "tree"). Whereas some of the terms referring
to working something in wood, e.g. carpenter, are not always
Uralic. Ács [a:tS] "carpenter" seems to be Turkic, ağaç [a-atS]