LL-L "History" 2010.09.26 (03) [DE-EN]

[Lowlands-L List]

=====================================================
*L O W L A N D S - L - 26 September 2010 - Volume 03
*lowlands.list at gmail.com - http://lowlands-l.net/
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
Archive: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-08)
Language Codes: lowlands-l.net/codes.php
=====================================================



From: Marcus Buck <list at marcusbuck.org>
Subject: LL-L "History" 2010.09.26 (01) [DE-EN]


From: Heiko Evermann <heiko.evermann at googlemail.com>

Subject: History



I thought you might like this entry from this dictionary:
"Holsteinisches Idiotikon
von Johann Friedrich Schütze
Königl. Dän. Kanzlei-Sekretraire
Altona 1806"

Entry "Setten":

"Setten (Dän. saette): setzen
Sade: Stille Ruhe. Richey macht es gegen Gramm der dies Wort vom Angs.
Sida Dän. Säder Sitten ableiten will,
wahrscheinlicher, daß es von Sate:Sitz abstamme.
B.W.B. Daher Saten, Undersaten: Sassen Eingesessene, Unterthanen,
der ursprüngliche Name unsrer Vorahnen, die an der Elbseite ihren Sitz
hatten,
die sich nach demselben Angelsaten, Holsaten, Wurtsaten unterschieden.
Das Wort Sachsen ist bloß durch Oberländer aus jenem Worte gebildet.
(Wolke Eingedichte Lpz. 1804. S.10)"

Till today I never came across the idea to base "Sassen" on the word
"to sit". Any comments?

By the way;
Who was Richey and who was Gramm and what does the abbreviation "B.W.B."
mean?



Richey is the author of the 1755 "Idioticon Hamburgense". Gramm is the
Danish philologist and historian Hans Gram. BWB most likely means "(Versuch
eines) Bremisch-Niedersächsischen Wörterbuchs" from 1767.

The etymology of "Sachsen" being derived from "Saten" is wrong. Schütze is
correct that "Holstein" and "Wursten" are derived from "Holtsaten" and
"Wurtsaten", but "Angelsaten" is a wrong analogy. The Saxons have their name
from the "sahs", a type of knife. That makes perfect sense from an
etymological point of view. Compare for "fohs" which developed into "fox" in
English, "Foss" in Low Saxon and "Fuchs" in German. The same with "sahson".
"Saxon" in English, "Sassen" in Low Saxon and "Sachsen" in German. It is
plain impossible that "Sachsen/Sassen/Saxon" is derived from "Saten". If
"Saten" was the etymological source we would have to assume that the Saxons
loaned their own name from High German and then High German again loaned the
name from the Saxons and applied the second Germanic sound shift a second
time. And all this must have happened 700 years before the time the second
Germanic sound shift according to scientific believe happened, because the
Romans already used the term "Saxon".

Marcus Buck



=========================================================
Send posting submissions to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
Send commands (including "signoff lowlands-l") to
listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands.list at gmail.com
http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/group.php?gid=118916521473498<http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#%21/group.php?gid=118916521473498>
=========================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20100926/0caa3a67/attachment.htm>