LL-L "Etymology" 2009.06.15 (01) [DE-EN]

[Lowlands-L List]

===========================================
L O W L A N D S - L - 15 June 2009 - Volume 01
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-08)
Language Codes: lowlands-l.net/codes.php
===========================================

From: Hellinckx Luc <luc.hellinckx at gmail.com>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology"

Beste Ron,
You wrote:

 Another such Low Saxon adjective-adverb is /basch/. I don't yet know its
> etymology. From French /bas/ 'low' perhaps?
>

Dat dücht mi eenfach, dat is dat sülve Woord, wat op Hoochdüütsch
"barsch" heet. Blot mit en rutfullen 'r', jüst as wi dat ok in en ganze
Reeg annere Wöör hebbt ('swatt', 'hatt', 'Masch', 'döschen', 'Wuddel',
'Baddel', 'Atillerie' un noch veel, veel mehr [woveel, hängt von'n Dialekt
af]).

Marcus Buck

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Etymology

Dank di, Marcus. Wat 'n Döösbattel ik bün! Ja, 'n Döösbartel mit 'n R
locker ...


Another word, which is semantically very close is "bats". In many Dutch
dialects it means "stern, surly, haughty" (Westvlaams, Veluws, Drents,
Gronings, Fries). Also shows up in Westfalian "batsig" and German "patzig" <
*backezen ~ batzen: lump. If Southwestern Brabantish would have known the
word, it might have been pronounced as "basch" (losing the t plus
palatalisation).

Influence of "bausch" (G), "boos" (D), "to boast" (E)?

Kind greetings,

Luc Hellinckx, Halle

----------

From: Brooks, Mark <mark.brooks at twc.state.tx.us>
 Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2009.06.13 (08) [EN]

Ron wrote: “Low Saxon has the diminutive-frequentive (-l-) form
*ruschel-*'to rustle', especially in reference to leaves and paper,
for instance
(equivalent to German *raschel-*).”

Here in Texas we also have the by-gone phenomenon of cattle rustling which
means stealing cattle from someone else’s herd to add to your own.  I
suppose that brought about the practice of branding cattle, so that one
could identify them.  I suspect this kind of rustle comes from the same
word, but expanded it meaning to steal cattle under cover of darkness and
quickly.

Mark Brooks

----------

From: Jonny <jonny.meibohm at arcor.de>
 Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2009.06.14 (01) [EN]

Beste Marlou,

Du schreyvst:

...used the adjective "resch" to characterize a brusque, energetic,
short-spoken person: "Sie hat so eine resche Art", "Sie war schon in ihrer
Jugend eine spröde, resche Person, aber bildschön...". It was mostly used
for women (perhaps men were welcome to be resch, but women weren't :-)), but
not always in a derogatory sense, sometimes with a certain appreciation. It
seems this word is a close relative of "risch", or maybe just another way of
spelling.

Additional to Ron I found some more interesting facts around this word:

*GRIMM:*

"1)  neben rasch erscheint auch die form resch, namentlich oberdeutsch,
ferner risch, rosch, rösch (w. m. s.); zwischen rasch und resch steht die
schreibung räsch: der ein räsche zunge"
*
Harper Online:*

"rash (adj.)
c.1300, "nimble, quick, vigorous," a Scottish and northern word, perhaps
from O.E. -ræsc (cf. ligræsc "flash of lightning"), from P.Gmc. *raskuz (cf.
M.L.G. rasch, M.Du. rasc "quick, swift," Ger. rasch "quick, fast"). Related
to O.E. horsc "quick-witted." Sense of "reckless, impetuous, heedless of
consequences" is attested from 1509.
 Allerbest!

Jonny Meibohm

----------

From: Dick Bateman <dickbateman at hotmail.com>
 Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2009.06.14 (01) [EN]

Hello there!

Ron wrote:

In English, adjectival-adverbial "-ish" is used similarly, not only as in
"Danish", "Polish" etc., but also in words such as "peckish", "sluggish",
"selfish", "childish", "mannish", 'devilish" and "fiendish". Informally, it
remains an impromptu active lexical morpheme, as in "noonish" (around noon),
"It'll be ninish by the time he's done", "Don't I look fattish in this
dress?", "Your intro is a bit on the longish side."

In this part of the world at least "ish" can colloquially also be used as a
modifier in its own right, although totally dependent on the preceding
utterance (usually a question), as an alternative to "very", "quite",
"amazingly", etc.  Most interestingly of all it isn't necessarily just a
short informal form of adjective+ish as in Ron's examples above:

"Are you feeling OK now?" - "Ish." (= "OKish")
"Are you looking forward to tomorrow?" - "Ish." (= ?)

Such answers may be accompanied by a waggling of the outstretched hand, palm
down!

Best wishes

Dick Bateman
Retired languages teacher
Germanist
South Saxon (originally from the Sussex coast)
Chapel-en-le-Frith, High Peak, Derbyshire

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Etymology

Hi, Dick!

How nice you decided to add your voice to a chorus of etymologists! Welcome!
I hope we'll hear from you regularly.

So, "ish" *has* become a word, at least in casual speech in a certain
region! I think it was merely a matter of time. I have occasionally resisted
the urge of saying "ish" myself while making a hand movement like that. It
seems so natural and tempting!

It may still be perceived as a somewhat jocular, slangy thing.
Theoretically, though, it is conceivable that it will develop into and
spread as a legitimate word, and the hand movement may become redundant.
Further in theory, "ish" could eventually be used without the implied
dependence (such as "Will you be here at ten then?" "Yeah, ...ish." (which
is really how it ought to be written for now). "Ish" could eventually come
to mean something like "approximately" or "vaguely". To go even farther on
this track of etymological theory in reverse, new words may develop on the
basis of "ish" (e.g. "All the dates and times are *ishy.")

Why is this a big deal? Independent words have been known to become clitics
and to eventually develop into suffixes, in the Germanic languages for
instance the "like" group becoming *-lic ~ -lig ~ ly*. (This process can be
traced very well among the Turkic languages where in some languages the
separate word is preserved, in some languages it has become a particle or
clitic which is dependent but is not integrated into the phonology of the
words to which it is attached, and in some languages it has become a true
suffix which adapts to the vowel harmony of the stems it modifies.) The case
of "ish", if it became legitimized, would be the same process in reverse: a
suffix that develops into a word. I can think of no other case like this.

•

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

*********************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20090615/fb68f940/attachment.htm>