LL-L "Morphology" 2003.09.25 (06) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 25.SEP.2003 (06) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
Posting Address: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
You have received this because you have 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.
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Peter J. Wright <peterjwright at earthlink.net>
Subject: Old English Verb Forms

A short while ago, there was a list discussion in which someone explained
why the English verb "to go" is defective, in that the past tense is "went",
derived from the verb "to wend".

My question is: What was the original past tense of the verb "to go" in OE,
and what form could it hypothetically have today *if* it had not
disappeared, or, if you will, *if* it had not went its way into oblivion . .
. ?

Consider:

Danish
“ga”  “gik” gangen

Swedish
“ga” “gick” gangen

Icelandic
“ganga” “gekk” “ganginn”

Dutch
“gaan" “ging” “gegaan”

German
“gehen” “ging” “gegangen”

Ergo:

English
“go” “??” “gone”

“gid” ? [gId]

Could it be that, since other phonetic changes had by that time occurred in
Old English (hich for example caused "g" before "i" to often be pronounced
as an voiced affricate ([dzh], as in "jungle")) caused people confusion over
whether or not the correct pronunciation of the word might not really be
[dzhId] instead of [gId]?  And that therefore a sort of general pandaemonium
ensued, and that everyone at one point just threw their hands up in dismay
one fine day and decided to just substitute "went" for "gid" in order to
skirt the whole issue?

?

Any ideas?  I'm open to any idea, no matter how far-fetched.  ;)

Curiously,

Peter Wright
New York, NY

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Morphology

Peter,

Here are the Old English forms of 'to go':

Infinitive:  gān
Present indicative:  iċ gā, þū gǣst, hē/hēo/hit gǣð, wē/ġē/hīe gāð
Past indicative:  iċ ēode, þū ēodest, hē/hēo/hit ēode, wē/ġē/hīe ēodon
Past participle:  ġegān

I don't know what happened between _ēod-_ and "went."

I postulate that, had _ēod-_ survived, it would now be something like
*_eed_; cf. crēopan (to creep), flēon (to flee), dēop (deep).

This *_eed_ is interesting -- and here comes "far-fetched" -- in that it
reminds me of Slavonic for 'to go' (*_id-_); e.g., Russian _идти_ (_idti_),
Ukrainian _ити_ (_iti_), Polish _iść_, Czech _jet_, Serbo-Croatian _ići_.
Note also Latin _iter-_ 'journey', 'road', _iterāre_ 'to repeat' (< *_it-_
'to proceed'?).

For good measure, here are the Modern North Saxon forms of 'to go'
(Neo-Hanseatic spelling):

Infinitive:  gaan
Present indicative:  ik ga, du gayst, hey/sey/it~dat gayt, wy/jy/sey gaat
Past indicative:  ik güng, du güngst, hey/sey/it~dat güng, wy/jy/sey güngen
Past participle:  (gegaan >) gaan

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

================================END===================================
* Please submit postings to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
* Postings 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.
=======================================================================