LL-L "Etymology" 2004.01.19 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 19.JAN.2004 (02) * 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: Críostóir Ó Ciardha <paada_please at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2004.01.17 (02) [E]

Ron,

Re: _vane_ v. _*fane_

It is probable that we have _vane_ instead of _*fane_ due to South West
English phonetics, where Eng. /f/ is regularly pronounced [v]. Now and again
this produced unexpected /v/ variants in standard English, e.g., _vixen_ for
a female fox. Lots of Flemish influence around South Wales/Bristol
mercantile area where the effect is most noted, too.

Criostóir.

----------

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2004.01.18 (04) [E]

Ron wrote:

>Hmmm ... something "weird" is going on with this "wrought," though, at
least
>in English.  Yes, it *is* the old past participial form of "to work" (< Old
>English _wyrcan_)

I always thought it is derived from "wright", as in "cartwright"? Something
like "made by a wright".

Gabriele Kahn

----------

From: Gavin Falconer <Gavin.Falconer at gmx.net>
Subject: wrocht

There appears to be some semantic differentiation in "to wrought" in modern
English, with meanings such as 'to effect', 'to produce' and 'to fashion
(wrought iron)'.  It seems to be replacing not only "to work" but "to wreak"
in
the present tense.  Google shows that it is attested in Yorkshire as early
as
the seventeenth century, and its misquotation is apparently also the origin
of the expression "reading, writing (wroughting) and arithmetic", first
recorded in Hansard in 1840.  I became aware of one Ulster-Scots writer in
particular using it and immediately made the same assumption as Sandy, but
later an
elderly native speaker claimed to a friend that he had grown up using it.
Of
course, its being used in Ulster does not necessarily mean that is used in
other forms of Scots.

Some verbs whose past tenses aren't obviously derived from a present tense
form have produced back formations.  In English, the originally past tense
"must" replaced the present tense "mote".  In Scots, "coff" is a back
formation
from the Middle Dutch loan "coft", originally the past tense of "copen", 'to
buy'.  The archaic perfect form "(S)he's wroughten" could have been
misinterpreted as the present continuous "(S)he's wroughting" under certain
circumstances, though obviously not in those Scots dialects where the
present
participle was -an(d).

Scots may be particularly liable to this back formation at the moment
because of decreasing knowledge of the language, decreasing acquaintance
with the
archaic conjugation of Victorian poetry and the King James Bible, the lack
of
a written standard and an activist temptation to make it as different from
English as possible.  On the other hand, I am not a native speaker of Ulster
Scots and so simply don't know if the form "wrochtin" is used in ordinary
speech.  As far as I know, it isn't recorded in any reference work at
present.  On
a related point, does the past tense form "wrocht" imply harder labour than
"worked"?  Semantic differentiation could provide part of the reason for the
development.

--
All the best,

Gavin

Gavin Falconer

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