LL-L: "Etymology" LOWLANDS-L, 28.OCT.1999 (02) [E/F/LS]

Thu Oct 28 16:04:45 UTC 1999

 ========================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 28.OCT.1999 (02) * ISSN 1089-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/~sassisch/rhahn//lowlands/>
 User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 =========================================================================
 A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
 =========================================================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 =========================================================================

From: Henno Brandsma [Henno.Brandsma at phil.uu.nl]
Subject: LL-L: "Etymology" LOWLANDS-L, 27.OCT.1999 (02) [E]

> From: Braw1 at aol.com
> Subject: LL-L: "Etymology" LOWLANDS-L, 25.OCT.1999 (07) [E]
>
> And "the moarn's moarn" is "tomorrow morning".

Just a short comment: In westerlauwer Frisian I would say
_moarntemoarne_ [mo. at nt@mwan@], probably an old dative in
the end: te + moarn + e (old case ending).
So, as you see, in WF _moarn_ is also used as both _morning_
and _tomorrow_

What do other Frisian speakers on the list use for "tomorrow morning"?

  In Glasgow, I believe
> "tomorrow" is the "morra" (one might question this "morra" to be a slang
> English rather than Scots).  Living in the States on comes across more
> Gleswegian Scots. When, my mother suddenly changed from saying "the moarn"
> tae uisein' "the morra".  I jokingly said don't ye change ma mither's
tongue.
>  And who have ye been paling aboot wi'?
> -Mark
>

Well, I've changed words from my dialect as well (no longer _ga^ns_ for
_goes_ (=_goose_), to name but one). Must be influence from other speakers
as well as a later self-imposed "purism", so to say.
In your case it goes the other way round, to a "less pure" Scots form..

Greetings,

Henno

----------

From: Henno Brandsma [Henno.Brandsma at phil.uu.nl]
Subject: LL-L: "Etymology" LOWLANDS-L, 22.OCT.1999 (02) [E/F/LS]

> From: Henno Brandsma [Henno.Brandsma at phil.uu.nl]
> Subject: LL-L: "Specialized terms" (was "Kinship terms") LOWLANDS-L,
>
> > From: R. F. Hahn [sassisch at yahoo.com]
> > Subject: Etymology
> >
> > > Low Saxon _Schummern_ ['SUmVn] (n.), _Schummeree_ [SUme'rEI] (f.),
> > > _Schummertied_ ['SUmVti:t] (f.), _Schummerstünd_ ['SUmVstYn(d)] (f.) (<
> > > /Sumer-/ _schummern_ 'to grow dark (in the evening)'), _Sniederfier_
> > > ['sni:dV,fi.V] (f., "tailor's knocking-off time").  Cf. Dutch _schemer_,

> > > _schemerdonker_ and _halfdonker_.
> >
> > I forgot to mention another one, a rather "pretty" one:
> >
> > _Ulenflucht_ ['?u:lnflUXt] "owls' flight", i.e., "time of owls flying (or
> > beginning to fly)" = 'dusk'
> > Cf. Westerlauwer Frisian _ûleflecht_ (_u^leflecht_) with the same meaning

Hoi allegearre:

one more addition to that: I looked up _schemering_ in my dictionary
of Tessels (the dialect of the Dutch island Texel, a Hollandic dialect
on a Frisian substratum) and found: _snippevluchie_ [ snIp at flYxi],
where _vluchie_ is a diminuative form of _vlucht_ (flight) [note that
the unrounded *flecht is not attested here], where _snip_ is a type
of bird (don't know the English name, it's a bird living in meadows
with a long beak). So this motive is quite widespread.
Maybe other people know similar words in other dialects?

> It Nederla^nsk is _schemer_, mei rekking yn iepen wurdlid fan [i] ta [e:].
> De Nedersaksykse foarm liket my ablaut of soks, of wurdt in [i] de^r
> faker in [u] (of [U])?
>
> Ek _skimer_ [skimer] komt foar. De [i] > [I] komt hjir trochdat it as
> twadde of earste lid fan in gearstalling in ferkoartsjende omjouwing
> stiet. Sjuchst hjir ek dat it Westerlauwer Frysk (en de oare dialekten
> allyka) gjin wet kinne fan rekking yn iepen wurdlid ta [e:]. As de [i]
> al rutsen wurdt, beha^ldt er syn kwaliteit.
>
> Groetnis,
>
> Henno
>
Ron skreau:

> Henno hett baven schreven: > > Cf. _jûn(tiid)_ (_ju^n(tiid)_)
> 'eve(ning/ntide)', _jûn(s)miel_ > > (_ju^n(s)miel_) "evening meal" =
> 'supper', /juun+ig/ _jûnich_ > > (_ju^nich_) 'evening-like', 'cool',
> 'moist'.  I take it also that > > _skimmer_ is the cognate of Dutch
> _schemmer_, Low Saxon _Schummer_ > > 'twilight' and English
> 'shimmer'.

> Is dat waaraftig vun /i/ up /ee/ gungen un nich anners
> rüm?  Dat Langmaken kümmt schients vun'n Nasaal-Mitluud (/m/).
> T.B. hett Nedderlandsch _aan_ [a:n] waar Düütsch _an_ [?an] hett.
> In't Neddersassische (Nedderdüütsche) gifft 't düsse Regel ook,
> avers dat wardt nich jümmer so schreven, t.B. _an_ [?a.n], _Himmel_
> ['hI.m=l] ~ _Hemmel_ ['he.m=l] ('heaven' [not 'sky', which is
> _Heven_ ['he:v=m] ~ ['he:b=m]!)  -- ook vör Liquiden, t.B. /old/ ->
> _o(o)ld_ [?o.lt] ('old').

I looked it up in some of my dictionaries and in the book "Niederdeutsch,
Sprache und Literatur, Band 1". The Old Germanic forms all attest
words with either a short [i] in open syllable or a long [i:] (also
in open syllable). Forms with double m, like Dutch _schim_, pl. _schimmen_
are considered to be secondary. E.g. Old Saxon _skimeringe_
> nhd _schimmer_ (from an etym. dict.), so with secondary mm.
Also related: Old Saxon _skime_ = Old English _skima_ = Old Norse _skimi_
= Middle Dutch _sceme_ (long e, from i in open syllable).
These all mean "shadow".
With ablaut (long i) Old Saxon/Old Low Franconian/ Old High German _ski^mo_
Old English _sci^ma_, Gothic _skeima_, all meaning _shine_ (N). Also
in "Hagelandsch" (a Dutch dialect) _schijmel_

All these derive from a root *ski/ski: + suffix *-mon-

Middle Low German had a lenghtening of vowels in open syllable, in the
book this is called _Tohndehnung_. In north Low Saxon (and also later
in the eastern dialects) this is accompanied by a lowering of the vowel
as well: both i and e become e:, which is lower than the old long e:
that was already present from Old Saxon. (Modern Groningen Low Saxon
has [e:] fro the lengthened and [ai] for the old one.)
But later -el and -er caused shortening of vowels. One of the
examples they give is _himel_ (Old Saxon) > he:mel (Middle Low German)
> hemmel (in modern Low Saxon). I think this can apply to _skimer_
as well, the shortening is then caused by -er.

> Nu is dat neddersassische (nedderdüütsche) Woord för ingelsch _shimmer_
> 'Schemer' ['Se:mV]!  Denn hebbt wie dütt Paar:

Ok, so this sche:mer might very well be a "re-lengthening" for [m]
of the short [E] that already was present in late Middle Low German.
Or it can be a preserved lenghtened e: as well, as it certainly
the case in most northern Dutch Low Saxon dialects. {BTW Eastfalian and
westfalian dialects behave differently in lengthening, some of them have
preserved different qualities of monophthongs, and later different
diphthongs for lenghtened i and e, for instance. But to keep it simple
I only discuss northern Low Saxon}

> 'Schemer' ('shimmer')
> 'Schummer' ('evening twilight')!
>
> > De Nedersaksykse foarm liket my ablaut of soks, of wurdt in [i] de^r
> > faker in [u] (of [U])?
>
> Labiaalisatschoon kümmt in 'n Barg neddersassische Dialekten faken vör,
> tomeerst as Labiaal-Assimilisatschoon: _Schimmel_ ~ _Schümmel_
('white horse',
> 'mold', 'fungus').  Man faken is dat nich vun wegen Assimilisatschoon,
> besünners in korte Vokalen; t.B.
_ditt_ ~ _dütt_ ('this'), _litt(ig)_ > _lütt_
> ('little'), _Licht_ ~ _Lücht_ ('light').
>
> Ook hoge un middelhoge Vokalen striedt miteenanner; t.B. _bit_ ~ _bet_
> ('till', 'up to'), _it_ ~ _et_ ('it'), _Guld_ ~ _Gold_ ('gold', cf. Dutch
> _Goud_), _stult_ ~ _stolt_ ('proud', cf. Dutch _stout_), _Putt_ ~ _Pott_
> ('pot'), _Himmel_ ~ _Hemmel_ ('heaven'), _Buddel_ ~ _Boddel_ ('bottle'),
> _Wuddel_ ~ _Woddel_ ('root', 'carrot'), _Hult_ ~ _Holt_ ('wood', cf. Dutch
> _hout_), _hülten_ ~ _hölten_ ('wooden').

This is interesting. Does the change e > u in labial environment (like
[m]) happen more often? And himmel ~ hemmel could also be a relic of
the fact that they both derive from [i] in open syllable. The first one
could also be an old shortening, as is suggested for _schimmer_ in both
my Dutch etymological dictionaries, while _schemmer_ has been lengthened and
lowered first..

This stuff is quite complicated. We should maybe have a look at dialect
maps for this matter, and older documents..

Groetnis,

Henno

----------

From: R. F. Hahn [sassisch at yahoo.com]
Subject: Etymology

Henno wrote:

> one more addition to that: I looked up _schemering_ in my dictionary
> of Tessels (the dialect of the Dutch island Texel, a Hollandic dialect
> on a Frisian substratum) and found: _snippevluchie_ [ snIp at flYxi],
> where _vluchie_ is a diminuative form of _vlucht_ (flight) [note that
> the unrounded *flecht is not attested here], where _snip_ is a type
> of bird (don't know the English name, it's a bird living in meadows
> with a long beak).

Henno, I think you are referring to what in English is 'snipe' -- genus
_Capella_, especially _Capella gallinago_, Low Saxon _Snipp_ (f., in some
dialects _Himmelszeeg'_ "sky goat"!), German _Schnepfe_ (f.), Spanish
_agachadiza_ (f.).

> Middle Low German had a lenghtening of vowels in open syllable, in the
> book this is called _Tohndehnung_. In north Low Saxon (and also later
> in the eastern dialects) this is accompanied by a lowering of the vowel
vas well: both i and e become e:, which is lower than the old long e:
> that was already present from Old Saxon. (Modern Groningen Low Saxon
> has [e:] fro the lengthened and [ai] for the old one.)
> But later -el and -er caused shortening of vowels. One of the
> examples they give is _himel_ (Old Saxon) > he:mel (Middle Low German)
> > hemmel (in modern Low Saxon). I think this can apply to _skimer_
> as well, the shortening is then caused by -er.

As I said earlier, this depends on the Modern Low Saxon dialect;  /i/ and /e/
compete; thus _Hemmel_ ~ _Himmel_, also in other environments, eg., _bet_ ~
_bit_.

> This is interesting. Does the change e > u in labial environment (like
> [m]) happen more often?

As far as I know, the respective changes are /i/ > /ü/ and /e/ > /ö/; i.e. the
only feature changing is [-labial] > [+labial].  I don't think there are many
examples of /e/ > /i/ > /u/.

Apparently labialization occurs only sporadically.  Or is there a rule?  I
don't know of anyone saying *_Hümmel_ (< _Himmel_) or *_Hömmel_ (< _Hemmel_),
but perhaps these do exist in certain dialects.  (Cf. _Licht_ ~ _Lücht_,
_Help_ ~ _Hölp_)

> This stuff is quite complicated. We should maybe have a look at dialect
> maps for this matter, and older documents..

Very true.

Best regards,

Reinhard/Ron

==================================END======================================
 * Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
   to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
 =========================================================================