From: alex by arcor
Message: 70790
Date: 2013-01-25
On 25.01.2013 02:59, dgkilday57 wrote:
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" wrote:
More corrections. I must stop quoting words from memory, which is wrong 4 out of 5 times. The Germanic derivatives of '5' containing a velar are collected in a footnote on p. 512 of Kauffmann's paper "Zur Geschichte des germanischen Consonantismus" (PBB 12:504-47, 1887). Kauffmann himself vouches for _fauchzk_ '50' in the grand duchy of Saxony, and cites Swabian _fuchze:_ '15', _fuchzk_ '50' from Birlinger (Alem. Spr. rechts des Rheins p. 178; Augsb. Wb. p. 149) and Weinhold (Bair. Gr. sec. 184); also Middle Dutch _vichtiene_ '15', _vichte_ '5th' (inflected weak) against _vijftich_ '50' and _vijfte_ '5th' from Franck (Mnl. Gr. sec. 109).
Kauffmann also gives (presumably from his native Swabian dialect) _fuft_ 'fifth', _fufze:_ '15', _fufzk_ '50'. The short vowel shows that the nasal cannot have been lost in historical Swabian. The stem _fuf-_ must continue an ancient nasalless form.
The soundlaw which I am assuming assimilated an occluded labiovelar in articulation to a preceding labial. This must have operated before the soundlaw which converted Proto-Gmc. *-Vnx- to *-V:x-, or there would be no nasal preserved in any form of Gmc. '5', no matter what analogical processes occurred later. I have not determined whether the labializing soundlaw occurred before or after Grimm's Law. If it occurred after, something like this would be expected:
PIE *penkWe '5', *pn.kWto- '5th'
Early PGmc *finxWe, *funxWta-
Later ... *finx(W), *funfta-
Later ... *fi:x, *funfta-
Analogical processes probably began operating before this last stage was reached. Contamination of *finx with *funfta- very likely produced *finf, *finfta-, the most widespread protoforms. Some High German dialects (including the literary standard) retain -nf, while others have assimilated the cluster to -mf, as has Gothic, and Old Norse further to -mm. But an alternative contamination *funx would later produce *fu:x, preserved in Swab. _fuchze:_, _fuchzk_, and a further contamination of *fu:x with *funfta- could yield *fu:fta-, whence Swab. _fuft_ and the new analogical creations _fufze:_, _fufzk_. Finally, *fi:x does seem to be represented in MD _vichtiene_ and, by analogy "against the grain", in _vichte_.
I am out of time for this week, and will attempt to address Sean's comments, and other matters, next week.
DGK
maybe there is an more easy task as one thinks, namely the dialectal variations due the art of speaking affected by the Umlaut.
I see there a variation of vocalsimus easy to accept as "funf-fünf-finf" or there where the nasal has been already lost, "fuf-füf-fif".
Alex