From: dgkilday57
Message: 70505
Date: 2012-12-05
>Diverse outcomes??
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > Thanks very much for this list. The most intriguing title is the one about words with Fi. -aav- corresponding to Gmc. *-aww-. If these came indeed from Gmc., they must have been borrowed before the Verschaerfung, when Gmc. laryngeal residues still constituted distinct phonemes, with the vowel-lengthening occurring later within Proto-Finnic. But the Gmc. shift *-o- > *-a- had already occurred (otherwise Fi. *-oov- from Early PGmc *-oHw-, no?), so if there is a stratum with Fi. *ka- from PGmc *Ha-, one would expect the EARLIER borrowings from EPGmc *Ho- to show *ko-, not *o-, unless I'm overlooking something (which I could well be, considering my track record in this thread).
> >
> Fin. didn't have -ww-, so in adapting Vww > VVw, nothing odd exists. Since the type of Gmc isn't known, and ww / jj has such diverse outcomes, nothing seems to be shown concerning H.
> Many words with -ww- are posited from something other than Hw; some definitely weren't from Hw. Some show the possibility that wj > ww (or wj > jj ; etc.):Considering the state of the Old Prussian remnants, it would be rash to assert that they contained original short -u-. As for the Gmc. words, no myth. opt. uww > uuw is necessary. Some IE roots have both anit.- and set.-forms, so here we posit *drew- beside *drewH-. Within a set.-root paradigm we can have *drewH-V- > Gmc. *trewwV-, *drewH-C- > *treuC-, *druH-V- > *tru:(w)V-, etc. Paradigmatic levelling requires no myth. opt. sound-shenanigans.
>
> druwis = belief / faith OPr;
> triggwa = alliance Go; trú(a) = belief ON; trúwa = trust/faith/fidelity OE;
>
> druwi:t = believe OPr;
> trúa = believe ON; trúan OHG; trúwian OE;
>
> trum = firm/strong/trustworthy OE;
>
>
> Notice that the cognates don't have uH > u: (or even related Gmc (trum)); u:w in some comes from opt. uww > uuw .