[gothic-l] SV: Eruli, Etymology and Scandinavia.

[Lada]

----- Original Message -----
From: Bertil Haggman <mvk575b at tninet.se>
To: <gothic-l at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 4:37 PM
Subject: [gothic-l] SV: Eruli, Etymology and Scandinavia.


> Keth,
>
> Really don't know what to answer here.
>
> I think I'll stick with Taylor, if you don't mind.
>
> Maybe you should try to present your own
> terminology if you don't like the linguistical
> terms used. You answer the questions, and
> please provide some sources.
>
> What is the role of Russian language here?
> Could you please develop the theme?
>
> Erulically
>
> Bertil
>
>
>
> By not adressing the presented argument, which was
> illustrated by a small sample dialogue between a ROMAN
> and a HERUL.
>
> No Sir, it was "recorded" for your benefit.
>
> But is "organic" or "inorganic" the correct term?
> I think it should be either voiced versus voiceless, OR pronounced
> versus unpronounced. Which of the two is it?
>
> I agree that if it was an H like the Russians have it,
> (you'll know what I mean, if you've ever spoken to
> a Russian who recently learned to speak Swedish)
> then the Romans might have transliterated it as Ch-
>
> But how can we be sure the various Germanic groups spoke
> uniformly? Granted, some may have used a "rough" H (à la Russe)
> but others may have used the H pretty much like it is
> used in modern German or Swedish.
>
> What we know is that for example Jordanes (or better:
> the various Mss. that derive from Jordanes original Ms.)
> sometimes writes ChILPERIC, and at other times HILPERIC.
>
> Now what does that tell us about how the Germanic groups
> of the period used H?
>
> And note that Heruls is also with H in the Jordanes Mss.
>
> The fact that he never writes "Cheruls", can be easily
> explained as being either due to:
> 1) convention
> 2) non-uniformity in the voicing of H among different Germanic groups.
>    (Hilperic was a Frank, not a Herul)
> 3) chance (tilfäldighet)
>
> In § 23 Jordanes says that the Greeks call them "Eluri",
> without H. But that is entirely according to our understanding
> that Greek had no H. Hence they simply dropped the sound.
>
>
>     Uuhm.. Greek language had an /h/ sound,infact something very like
modern german ach-laut,and it was pronounced at the time and still is, so if
a
Greek-speeking person wanted to write /x/ he'd use the chi letter. So my
staetment that the greek language had no /h/ was probably not put clearlu
enough and let me stase it correctly: the greek language of the time did not
have the /h/ sound, but it had the /x/ sound, which was used when
translitterating foreign names.
                           Hellenicaly
                                                Il Akkad
>
>
>
>
> 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/
>
>
>
>




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Stock for $4.
No Minimums.
FREE Money 2002.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/BgmYkB/VovDAA/ySSFAA/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/