[gothic-l] "Umlaut" in Gothic?

[Le Bateman]

Would airils be the same as Norse jarl and Old  English earldorman. I had
seen this OE word as  eorl.
Le
----- Original Message -----
From: "gazariah" <brahmabull at hushmail.com>
To: <gothic-l at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 8:03 PM
Subject: [gothic-l] "Umlaut" in Gothic?


Vladimir,

I'm just a beginner in Gothic, but I do know something about Slavic
linguistic history. I have some questions and notes.


>"Airils" is [jarilo]. Should "ai"
>be here pronounced as [e], the Russian
>version would be [(j)erilo]. Though, in
>case of the pronunciation [aj], I realize
>a probability of a metathesis
>[ajrilo]-[jarilo], which would explain
>the Russian cognate without the a-umlaut.

What is "Airils"? Is it a name? A figure in mythology? (I said I'm no
whiz at Gothic.) Where is it attested? If it's a name, does it have
root meanings, like so many names in Germanic?

Vasmer believes that Russian /jarilo/ comes
from /jara/ 'spring'(cognate with English 'year'.) That would make
good sense given the time of year that the ritual with jarilo was
performed. Do you have reasons for rejecting this etymology?

If the Russian word is being used as evidence for the pronunciation
of Gothic, you must think it's a borrowing, not a cognate, right? If
the word were borrowed from Gothic into Common Slavic (the Goths were
not around later), its form would have violated the law of rising
sonority, which required (simplifying) that every syllable end in a
vowel. So /aj/ is out. Metathesis might have occured, but in general
the Slavic reflex of /aj/ in a closed syllable would be jat', a vowel
which had a different pronunciation from /e/, although in Russian the
two later fell together and the letter jat' was eliminated from the
alphabet after the revolution in 1917. But if /aj/ of Airils went to
jat' in Slavic, you would end up with /je/ in modern Russian, which
you don't have. If you want to think that /aj/ was "umlauted" in
Gothic, you would still end up with /je/, not with /ja/ as seen in
Russian.


>the Russian cognate to
>Gothic "hlaifs" as [hleb] indicating
>replacement "ai">[e]. But I'd like to add
>the Finnish cognate "läipä" indicating
>preservation of [aj].

Again, this is generally thought to be a loan, not a cognate. And
the /aj/ from Gothic would end up as jat', which is exactly what it
did, with all the usual reflexes in Slavic: Russian /xleb/,
Ukrainian /xlib/ and so on. (Just to keep up, the nom.-acc.
form /xl#b/ used to end with a short vowel, again in keeping with the
law of rising sonority.) The change of diphthong /aj/ to jat' holds
for all of Slavic and can be seen as part of the law of rising
sonority. See for example Slavic /c#na/ Russian /cena/ 'price'
cognate (no borrowing) with Lithuanian /kaina/.

So I don't see how either of these Russian words can help to support
or refute any claim about "umlaut" in Gothic.

I know I've written a lot of things you know here, Vladimir. I'm just
trying to make it possible for others to see the point.

Best regards,
Gazariah






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 Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/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/