Yew Two

[X99Lynx at aol.com]

In a message dated 6/28/2001 3:53:52 AM, jrader at Merriam-Webster.com writes:
<< Mr. Long is playing with Irish orthography here.  The Old Irish word
is <ibar>, with a short i, as cited earlier in the message.  The
spellings with <iu> reflect Early Modern Irish developments (growth
of a glide vowel, shift of the diphthongal crest) and resemblance to
Greek <iophoros> is chimerical.  Fluctuations between <io/iu>
spellings in Modern Irish/Scottish Gaelic words reflect mid/high
vowel exchanges in dialects that have nothing to do with the Old
Irish forms of the words.>>

Well, the problem is that I can't tell you when or how often the word would
have been borrowed, if in fact it was ever borrowed.  What I was trying to do
was suggest just one more alternative explanation for <ibar> et al.  And the
reason I like it is because I don't think that any one can say for sure how
<iophoros> would have been borrowed into Celtic or some part of Celtic.

If you have a notion of what it would looked like, I'd be happy to hear it.

<iophoros> > <ibar> > <iubhar> would work just as well.  In Gaelic, of
course, I only had <iubhar>, so that's what I used.  And it looked good.

I should say - again - that the real problem I have with *ebor as some
ancient name for yew is that the word seems to apply to a whole range of
woods and bone materials, consistent with the historical and technical
evidence regarding these objects and the clear use of the same or similar
words to refer to those objects.  I think that *ebor was a trade word that
circulated where these objects or materials or substitutes went.  And was
borrowed in one form or another.

But I LIKE the <iophoros> connection because it's a chance to remind somebody
somewhere that the Greeks had some connection with Celtic (and maybe even
Vasconian) speakers, on and off, since way before Celtic historical times.

Regards,
Steve Long