LL-L "Etymology" 2003.03.04 (04) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 04.MAR.2003 (04) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * admin at lowlands-l.net * Encoding: Unicode UTF-8
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/rules.htm
Posting Address: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archive: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
=======================================================================
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: Theo Homan <theohoman at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2003.03.03 (07) [E]

> From: Global Moose Translations
> <globalmoose at t-online.de>
> Subject:  LL-L "Etymology" 2003.03.03 (06) [E]
>
> Ron wrote:
>
> > I cannot come up with English and Scots cognates
> of the word group for
> > "true" that appears to be derived from
> Indo-European *_uË~er-_ '(do a)
> favor'
> > (> "trustworthy" > "believable" > "true"):
> >
> > West Germanic: 'true':
> > Dutch: waar
> > Afrikaans: waar
> > Lowlands Saxon (Low German): waar (~ wahr)
> > German: wahr
> >
> > I would expect something like *_wear_ (with an
> "eer" sound as in 'deer')
> in
> > English and *_wair_ in Scots; cf. ...
>
> Maybe this is a bit far-fetched, but what about the
> verb form "were",
> especially in the construction "as it were"? This
> cannot be derived from "to
> be", just as "waren" in German or Dutch is very
> different from "sein" or
> "zijn".
>
> Couldn't it be that things that happened have
> already "come true", and
> therefore "were"?
>
> Just a theory...
> Gabriele Kahn
----------------
nonono. The verb 'to be' in lowl.ll. is not consistent
in having one stem to be used for all forms. The
'conjugation' of 'to be' is made up of three different
old stems.
vr.gr. Theo Homan

----------

From: Allison Turner-hansen <athansen at arches.uga.edu>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2003.03.03 (07) [E]

> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject:  Etymology
>
> I should have added Westerlauwer Frisian and Yiddish, and Afrikaans where
I
> forgot it:
>
> W. Frisian: wier
> > West Germanic: 'true':
> > Dutch: waar
> > Afrikaans: waar
> > Lowlands Saxon (Low German): waar (~ wahr)
> > German: wahr
> Yiddish: vor (װאָר)
>
> WF: klear
> > LS klaar
> > D klaar
> A: klaar
> > G klar
> Y: klor (קלאָר)
> > E clear
> > S clair
>
> WF: burd (labial assimilation?)
> > LS baard
> > D baard
> A: baard
> > G Bart
> Y: bord (באָרד)
> > E beard
> > S baird
>
> Regards,
> Reinhard/Ron

Ron,
I found this word in my Old English dictionary (by J.R. Clark
Hall).  My telnet e-mail won't do the spelling correctly, but it is wae:r.
That is, w, long ash, r.  It has the meaning 'true, correct'.  However,
the only citation is from Genesis, which is a translation from Old Saxon.

Allisom Turner-Hansen

> ----------
>
> From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
> Subject:  LL-L "Etymology" 2003.03.03 (06) [E]
>
> Ron wrote:
>
> > I cannot come up with English and Scots cognates of the word group for
> > "true" that appears to be derived from Indo-European *_u˘er-_ '(do a)
> favor'
> > (> "trustworthy" > "believable" > "true"):
> >
> > West Germanic: 'true':
> > Dutch: waar
> > Afrikaans: waar
> > Lowlands Saxon (Low German): waar (~ wahr)
> > German: wahr
> >
> > I would expect something like *_wear_ (with an "eer" sound as in 'deer')
> in
> > English and *_wair_ in Scots; cf. ...
>
> Maybe this is a bit far-fetched, but what about the verb form "were",
> especially in the construction "as it were"? This cannot be derived from
"to
> be", just as "waren" in German or Dutch is very different from "sein" or
> "zijn".
>
> Couldn't it be that things that happened have already "come true", and
> therefore "were"?
>
> Just a theory...
> Gabriele Kahn

Gabriele,
I think 'as it were' has the subjunctive (so-called, really the
optative) of the verb 'to be'.  I assume the meaning is "as it may be".

Allison Turner-Hansen

================================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.
 =======================================================================