In Norway we say Snorre, because the old Norse /i/ often turned into
Norwegian /e/. (e.g: ON Hrafninn - No. ravnen) Snorre is a normal name here
too, even if it isn't common. Though I believe it was the translation of
Heimskringla to Norwegian which caused Snorri/e to be reintroduced into the
language of Norway. I can't be certain though. Thus We say Snorre Sturlason,
not Snorri Sturluson because the translators made it so. All old names were
modernized, and I believe they did a good job.
Terje
>From: "xigung" <xigung@...>
>Reply-To: norse_course@yahoogroups.com
>To: norse_course@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [norse_course] Re: Orthography in Old Icelandic; æj, Haukur minn,
>hvernig var þetta nú aftur?
>Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 13:30:29 -0000
>
>Hi BerLaug,
>I have also noted the great variation in, for example, the final
>-i versus a final -e. My first idea connected with that, is
>that when I see modern Icelandic references, it is always
>"Snorri", whereas in Norway the normal form is "Snorre".
>I have also seen a final -e like that in some of the older
>MSS. I wonder if it could not also be a matter of dialectal
>differences - differences that grew stronger as time went by.
>
>Best
>Xigung
>
>
>
>--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, Berglaug Ásmundardóttir
><berglauga@...> wrote:
> > Might it not be that he's simply using the oldest spelling rules for old
> > icelandic (not norse), say, they first grammarians spelling? It sure
>looks
> > to me as if he's using the oldest Icelandic vowel system I learned.
>Haukur
> > may remember this better than I do (since I was the one drawing
>little comic
> > series about evil umlauts chasing innoccent vowels, in class), but
>using e
> > for i in an unstressed syllable was commonplace at least until the
>twelfth
> > century, I think, because of the complicated vowel system. At that
>time, i
> > was closer to í than it later became, and the unstressed frontal
>unrounded
> > vowel was closer to the stressed vowel e than i (that is, it was
>written e
> > because that sound was phonologically closest to an [I] sound). I'm
>not sure
> > about the others, but æ (an open e, often written with a hooked e) was a
> > part of the vowel system at that time, it's the i-umlaut from a. And
>o was
> > used for u in unstressed syllables, and even where it is stressed, o
>and u
> > have a sligt tendency to get in each other's way (a mess caused (I
>seem to
> > recall) by the language's indecision about a-umlaut). And what have
>you got
> > against two e's in ellefo? It's spelled with two e's in modern
>icelandic,
> > you know. (although the unstressed o has changed to u). Using the first
> > grammarian's spelling (at least in vowels, not so sure about
>'hásteflingar')
> > seems like rather good practice to me, not at all an error.
> >
> > Again, this is just a suggestion, I'm hoping that Haukur will shed some
> > light on the matter
> >
> > Berglaug
> >
> >
> > >
> > > That's a lot of misspellings.
> > > Did Lass make as many misspellings for the other Germanic languages?
> > > I noticed that the copyright is 1994,
> > > but can you verify that this is the first edition,
> > > and not just a new printing with the first edition
> > > being, say, 1904, or something like that?
> > >
> > >
> > > In a message dated 11/21/2003 2:25:11 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > brahmabull@... writes:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Greetings!
> > > >
> > > > I am an amateur, interested in Old Norse as part of early
>Germanic. I
> > > > have been reading Roger Lass's <Old English: A historical linguistic
> > > > companion> (Cambridge: 1994) and find it helpful in getting
>control of
> > > > some basics.
> > > >
> > > > There are some misprints or mistakes in the book, and one whole
>class
> > > > of them involves Old Icelandic. Can anybody tell me what these forms
> > > > represent? Oldest attestations, or maybe a mnemonic scheme for
>learning
> > > > the paradigms? I have Gordon's book, which I take as my authority.
> > > >
> > > > 1. Lass has /e/ for /i/ wherever this appears in the dative singular
> > > > masc and neut. Even /deg-e/, where he explains the stem change
>is due
> > > > to i-umlaut. For i-stem gestr Lass gives nom. pl. gest-er and
>acc. pl.
> > > > gest-e.
> > > >
> > > > 2. The u-stem example is even stranger:
> > > > sg.
> > > > N sun-r for son-r
> > > > G son-ar
> > > > D syn-e for syn-i
> > > > A sun for son
> > > > pl.
> > > > N syn-er for syn-ir
> > > > G son-a
> > > > D sun-um
> > > > A sun-o for sun-u
> > > >
> > > > BUT a dative -i for foet-i (with oe=ligature)
> > > >
> > > > 3. Here is the present conjugation of bera
> > > > sg
> > > > 1 bær-a
> > > > 2 bær-er
> > > > 3 bær-e
> > > > pl
> > > > 1 bær-em
> > > > 2 bær-eÞ
> > > > 3 bær-e
> > > >
> > > > I understand from Gordon that ö (hook o) to á and then i-ulaut to æ.
> > > > So why /e/ for /i/ in all the endings?
> > > >
> > > > 4. Last thing: for '9' and '10' Lass gives OIc nió and tió,
>instead of
> > > > the expected níu and tíu; '11' is ellefo for ellifu.
> > > >
> > > > This is not an exhaustive list! I am going to write all these up for
> > > > the author, but before I can do that I would like to have some
>idea his
> > > > reasoning.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Gazariah
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > A Norse funny farm, overrun by smart people.
> > > >
> > > > Homepage: http://www.hi.is/~haukurth/norse/
> > > >
> > > > To escape from this funny farm try rattling off an e-mail to:
> > > >
> > > > norse_course-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > > A Norse funny farm, overrun by smart people.
> > >
> > > Homepage: http://www.hi.is/~haukurth/norse/
> > >
> > > To escape from this funny farm try rattling off an e-mail to:
> > >
> > > norse_course-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
>
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Messenger
http://www.msn.no/messenger Den korteste veien mellom deg og
dine venner