[gothic-l] Saúrts/Surtr in phonological darkness or light?

[konrad_oddsson]

This message is for Troel, Bertil and Einar, who were previously 
discussing the name "Surtr" in connection with Gothic, and for 
anyone else with an interest in this topic. I find forms such 
as "Swartus" or "Swartw-" to be unlikely for the simple reason that 
Gothic phonology tends to have "aú" (ON."o") before "r". Whereas 
Norse shows both primitive "u" a "o" in positions before "r", fourth 
century Gothic shows "aú"(compare N."þeir urðu", N."hann er orðinn", 
N."urt" for Gothic "waúrts", N."orð" for Gothic "waúrd", "at yrkja" 
and "hann orti" for forms of Gothic "waúrkjan"). On the basis of 
this I am inclined to regard the form "Saúrts" as more likely for 
Gothic. Also, a simple adjectival form like "black/dark" would 
probably be confusing to even native speakers of a language - 
sentences like "Black is coming soon" would be vague. Compare also 
the fact that the name is "Surtr" in Norse, while the adjective 
"svartr" is so common as to be in daily use in Scandinavian tongues 
today. "Saúrts" would be declined: N. Saúrts, A. Saúrt, D. Saúrta, 
G. Saúrtis. Compare also that the Norse verb for to "grow black/dark 
is "sortna", again showing that Norse can have "o" (Gothic aú) as 
well as "u" in positions where we would expect only "aú" before "r" 
in fourth century Gothic. 

I would like to know your thoughts and responses to "Saúrts" as the 
Gothic name for the firey enemy of the divine ones. 

Regards,
Konrad.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Plan to Sell a Home?
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J2SnNA/y.lEAA/jd3IAA/wWMplB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>. 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/