LL-L: "Etymology" LOWLANDS-L, 04.MAY.2001 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 04.MAY.2001 (01) * ISSN 189-5582 * 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>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic, Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

From: Stefan Israel <stefansfeder at yahoo.com>
Subject: "Etymology" LOWLANDS-L, 03.MAY.2001

Ron wrote:

> (1)
> I am wondering about the origin of the English word
> "haversack."  Dictionaries give French _havresac_ as the donor

> word and explain that this comes from
> German _Habersack_ 'sack/bag for oats'.  I take this with a
> grain of salt.
> Did French regularly convert intervocalic German(ic) /b/ to
> /v/?  It is true that 'oats' is _Haber_ (< Old High German
> _habaro_) in some German dialects, though it is _Hafer_ in
> Modern Standard German.  Could French _havresac_ not
> have come from Low Saxon (Low German)?

Pre-Old French shifted /b/ to /v/: Lat. _habeo_ > _avoir_, but
that happened very early (how early I don't know), so I'd be
dubious that _haber_ became _haver_.   The word could have been
borrowed from Low Saxon, or Dutch, or even from the Franks back
in Charlemagne's time.

> (2)
> For a simple introduction about Low Saxon (Low German) for an
> audience/readership of non-linguists, I would like to provide
> a handful of examples of Low Saxon loanwords in English.

As you say, it is very difficult to distinguish loans from Dutch
from those from Low Saxon.  You might search for words that
wouldclearly distinguish the two varieties, e.g. /S/ vs. /sk/,
e.g. the _shrimp_ that you mentioned, vs. Dutch _school_.  That
tends to distinguish the two varieties (although Low Saxon
continued to pronounced <sch> as [sk] for a while; even that
distinction's not absolute.

Stefan Israel

==================================END===================================
 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>.
=======================================================================
 * 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
=======================================================================