Re: Why there is t- in German tausend "thousand"?

---In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@...> wrote:

2013/11/20, dgkilday57@... <dgkilday57@...>:

>

(...)

> >
> *Bhr.:, so why should Kluge &c. have written there's no explanation for
> #t-?
>
> [DGK:]
>
> They did not. "Lautlich zu erwarten wäre nhd. d-", they wrote s.v. tausend,
> not "es gibt keine Erklärung für nhd. t-". See the comments s.v. Docht:
> "Der Anlaut t im Ahd. und Mhd. beruht auf einer auch sonst zu beobachtenden
> [sic] Weiterverschiebung (vgl. tausend)." Other examples of OHG or MHG t-
> from Gmc. *þ- can be found s.vv. dempfen, deuten, deutsch, Donner, dorren,
> dörren, du, Ton 'Lehm', Trümmer, and tunken, probably s.v. Truhe, and in my
> opinion s.v. dunkel (which I prefer to connect with _tunken_ and Lat.
> _tingo:_, not with ON _dokkr_). Your method of constructing a ghost lexeme
> for each example would turn High German into a haunted house.

*Bhr.: tiutsch tahe trumm tunken are only MHG and we are dealing with
OHG instances; tempfen tiuten tonar torrēn terren truha tu in Notker
are regular at sentence beginning and word-initially when the
preceding word ends in a voiceless sound, while in Alsatian OHG, in
Upper Alemannic, in the glosses of St. Gallen, and in the "Codex of
Salzburg" (Salzburger Verbrüderungsbuch) of 784 (cf. also the Glossae
Keronis) are due to Romance scribal uses (<t> for <th>).
Only occur tu^sun and tru^bo occur quite often. For the latter, "nhd.
Traube (...) Grundbedeutung wahrscheinlich »Klumpen«. (...)
Wahrscheinlich zu idg. trup (Weiterbildung zu tru [...]). Vgl. lit.
trupùs bröcklig, trupù trupė́ti in Brocken zerfallen (...)"
(Wortschatz der Germanischen Spracheinheit unter Mitwirkung von
Hjalmar S. Falk gänzlich umgearbeitet von Alf Torp (Vergleichendes
Wörterbuch der Indogermanischen Sprachen von August Fick — Vierte
Auflage — Dritter Teil), Göttingen, Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1909
[573 S.], p. 195), cf. Pokorny IEW 1073 (√*treuH- in Old Slav. tryjǫ)
: ibid. 275 √*dhreubh- gr. thrýptō ,zerreiben, zerbröckeln (...)‘
(√*dhreuHp- in OSax. drūƀōn), therefore OHG thrūbo < PIE *truHp-ón- ≠
OHG trūbo < PIE *dhruHbh-ón- (OHG synonyms from parallel PIE synonymic
roots)

DGK:  You have invented a root *dhreuHbh- ex nihilo.  There is no laryngeal in *dhreubh- as shown by the short vowel in the Greek zero-grade reflexes.  Moreover the words interpreted as formed from extensions of *dhreu- involve casting down, breaking to pieces, crushing, etc.  This is done with clusters of grapes, but not specifically with clusters of grapes, and most of the actual words have no specific application to viticulture or wine-making.  Therefore, the connections in the EWDS are much more plausible than yours.

> [DGK:]
>
> On the other
> hand a Weiterverschiebung would have to be either a regional third
> consonant-shift or a sporadic wandering of d- to t- which would make Sean
> Whalen jump for joy. I prefer instead a Sonderverschiebung, with Gmc. *þ-
> unaffected by the High German shift, but developing regularly in normally
> accented words into *t- in (at least) Upper Alemannic and Upper Bavarian,
> and *d- in Central German dialects.
>
> In principle this hypothesis is testable by examining the geographic
> distribution of t-anlaut in these words, something which I intend to do in
> coming weeks.
>

*Bhr.: So you'll try to demonstrate something that dozens of scholars
have already tried to do, while I'm satisfied with proposing something
that every scholar should have already taken into consideration and
has never done just because of a prejudice against PIE reconstructions

DGK:  You are as conceited as Sean Whalen.  Most scholars do not waste their time inventing arbitrary PIE roots to explain all words as inherited, for this robotic drone-work does not advance our knowledge, any more than Sean's arbitrary optional soundlaws do.  It is not a prejudice against PIE reconstructions, but a recognition that reducing scientific inquiry to the robotic recitation of platitudes amounts to intellectual nihilism.

If I accept that you have done my homework for me, and that only 'tausend' and 'Traube' have historically significant t-anlaut, then all I need to do is back-date my original proposal.  Notker's orthography makes it clear that when uttered in isolation, OUG words continuing Gmc. þ-anlaut began with [t].  Thus there is no objection to _tûsunt_ and _trûbo_ spreading northward with a Pre-Florentine wine-trade.

As for the plausibility of interdialectal borrowing producing unexpected anlaut, we need look no further than _vat_, _vane_, and _vixen_ in English.