Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [tied] batch

Expand Messages
  • Rick McCallister
    What happened to bag? I was expected it as the next logical sequence From: dgkilday57 To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, April 7,
    Message 1 of 5 , Apr 8, 2010
    • 0 Attachment

      What  happened to bag? I was expected it as the next logical sequence



      From: dgkilday57 <dgkilday57@...>
      To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Wed, April 7, 2010 8:01:13 PM
      Subject: [tied] batch

       


      Middle English <bacche>, <bache> 'batch', <þacche> 'thatch', and <wacche> 'watch' are structurally parallel. The latter continues the Old English weak feminine abstract <wæcce> 'wakefulness' . This noun is directly related to a weak verb <wæccan> 'to be awake, watchful, vigilant' of which only the participle <wæccende> is attested in West Saxon, though finite forms are found in Northumbrian, including a preterit <ge-wæhte>. The usual WS weak verb in this sense is <wacian>, corresponding to Old Frisian <wakia> and OS <wakôn>, while OHG has <wahhên>. Rather than reconstructing both a Class II *wako:n and a Class III *wake:n to Common Gmc. (thus Köbler, Ae. Wb. s.v. <wacian>), I prefer to see the Class III form as original, preserved in OHG, but remodelled into *wako:jan in Ingvaeonic, where many other Class III weak verbs lost their characteristic morphology. And rather than explaining <wæccan> as a by-form of <weccan> 'to arouse, waken' (Gmc. *wakjan) whose umlauted vowel was replaced in early Old English by the /a/ retained in <wacol> 'wakeful' and the like (thus effectively Bülbring, Ae. Elemb. §177), I prefer to see a denominative formed from <wæcce> in Old English, well after the period of /i/-/j/-umlaut, by simple analogy with inherited Class I denominatives showing vowel-agreement with their nouns (e.g. <bend> 'band, fetter, string', <bendan> 'to fetter, confine with string, bend (a bow)', from Gmc. *bandiz, *bandjan). In this view the preterit <wæhte> follows the model of <wehte> to <weccan>, <þehte> to <þeccan>, etc., in which the umlauted vowel of the present has replaced the regular stem-vowel of the preterit <weahte>, <þeahte>, etc. And the wk. f. <wæcce> owes its form not to WGmc /j/-gemination but to Kluge's Law, continuing Gmc. *wakko:n- 'wakefulness' , the protoform being *wog^nó:n-.

      ME <bacche> is usually referred to an OE wk. f. *bæcce connected with <bacan> (st. VI) 'to bake'. It is obvious that this noun cannot come directly from <bacan>, any more than <wæcce> can come directly from <wacan> (st. VI) 'to awaken, be born, originate'. The gemination along with lack of umlaut points to a Gmc. *bakko:n- 'action of baking', easily concretized as 'amount produced by one act of baking', i.e. 'batch'. If Greek <phó:go:> 'I roast' is a cognate normal-grade present, the root is *bHeh3g- and the protoform of *bakko:n- must be the zero-grade *bH&3gnó:n-. In any case related Gmc. forms with /kk/ and /k/ are found. OHG has both <backan> and <bachan>, <bahhan> (st. VI) 'to bake', OS has the agent <bakkeri> 'baker', MD has <bakken> (weak) 'to bake', and ON has <baka> (wk. II). I find it implausible that Gmc. had *bako:n, *bakan, and *bakkan in identical senses, or that two strong verbs with distinct protostems (*bH&3g-é-, *bH&3g-né-) would have been inherited with the same function. Instead, I think a Class II weak denominative *bakko:n 'to make a batch' was formed from *bakko:n- 'batch', and this weak verb interacted with *bakan 'to bake' in different ways as the meanings fell together in the individual languages. In the Low Countries, *bakko:n (later *bakko:jan) prevailed over *bakan. The weak cross *bako:n is represented by ON <baka> and Upper German <bachen>. The strong cross *bakkan competed with the original *bakan in OHG and MHG, and has now prevailed in HG <backen>. In English, *bakan prevailed over *bakko:jan quite early, since the latter is unattested, but ironically the winning verb became weak, with the participle <baken> going obsolete early in the Modern phase. Nevertheless, if my analysis is correct, only English has preserved the noun which generated *bakko:n in the first place.

      In the OED, <þacche> is cited from the Bodleian MS. of Trevisa (1398), but the word is corrected to <thetche> in the printed edition (1495). After 1600 however other citations show the noun <thatch> prevailing over <thetch>. The explanation given is hardly satisfactory, making <þacche> a "late collateral form of <thack> sb." whose auslaut is "conformed to <thatch> vb.", while the latter has "apparently taken its vowel from <thack>". That is, we are supposed to believe that <thack> 'roof, roofing material' (OE <þæc> st. n., Gmc. *þakam) lent its vowel to <thetchen> 'to roof over, cover' (OE <þeccan> wk. I, Gmc. *þakjan), which then lent its inlaut back to <thack>. Such a reciprocal trade, while not impossible, is rendered implausible by the chronology, and seems unnecessary anyway. We can understand <þacche> as the regular development of an OE wk. f. *þæcce, from a Gmc. abstract *þakko:n- 'roofing', easily concretized, from a protoform *tognó:n-. The noun <thetche> then has been altered from <þacche> under the influence of the regularly inherited verb <thetch(en)> , and since this altered noun dies out after 1600, it may have been nothing but a hypercorrection of printers which never took root in the spoken language. On the other hand the modern verb <thatch>, a simple denominative, has replaced this inherited verb <thetch>, but there are plenty of similar examples. As with <wacche> and <bacche>, the recognition that the geminate in the form ancestral to <þacche> is due to Kluge's Law, and not to WGmc /j/-gemination, avoids the difficulty of accounting for the missing /j/-umlaut. In this case it spares us the scenario of nouns and verbs in late ME picking each other's pockets for substitute phonemes.

      DGK


    • Torsten
      ... This might be relevant http://www.systranet.com/dictionary/dutch-english/bak receptacle, box, bin Da. bakke tray de Vries bakki 2 m kleines fahrzeug
      Message 2 of 5 , Apr 9, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@...> wrote:
        >
        > ME <bacche> is usually referred to an OE wk. f. *bæcce connected with <bacan> (st. VI) 'to bake'. It is obvious that this noun cannot come directly from <bacan>, any more than <wæcce> can come directly from <wacan> (st. VI) 'to awaken, be born, originate'. The gemination along with lack of umlaut points to a Gmc. *bakko:n- 'action of baking', easily concretized as 'amount produced by one act of baking', i.e. 'batch'. If Greek <phó:go:> 'I roast' is a cognate normal-grade present, the root is *bHeh3g- and the protoform of *bakko:n- must be the zero-grade *bH&3gnó:n-. In any case related Gmc. forms with /kk/ and /k/ are found. OHG has both <backan> and <bachan>, <bahhan> (st. VI) 'to bake', OS has the agent <bakkeri> 'baker', MD has <bakken> (weak) 'to bake', and ON has <baka> (wk. II). I find it implausible that Gmc. had *bako:n, *bakan, and *bakkan in identical senses, or that two strong verbs with distinct protostems (*bH&3g-é-, *bH&3g-né-) would have been inherited with the same function. Instead, I think a Class II weak denominative *bakko:n 'to make a batch' was formed from *bakko:n- 'batch', and this weak verb interacted with *bakan 'to bake' in different ways as the meanings fell together in the individual languages. In the Low Countries, *bakko:n (later *bakko:jan) prevailed over *bakan. The weak cross *bako:n is represented by ON <baka> and Upper German <bachen>. The strong cross *bakkan competed with the original *bakan in OHG and MHG, and has now prevailed in HG <backen>. In English, *bakan prevailed over *bakko:jan quite early, since the latter is unattested, but ironically the winning verb became weak, with the participle <baken> going obsolete early in the Modern phase. Nevertheless, if my analysis is correct, only English has preserved the noun which generated *bakko:n in the first place.
        >
        > In the OED, <þacche> is cited from the Bodleian MS. of Trevisa (1398), but the word is corrected to <thetche> in the printed edition (1495). After 1600 however other citations show the noun <thatch> prevailing over <thetch>. The explanation given is hardly satisfactory, making <þacche> a "late collateral form of <thack> sb." whose auslaut is "conformed to <thatch> vb.", while the latter has "apparently taken its vowel from <thack>". That is, we are supposed to believe that <thack> 'roof, roofing material' (OE <þæc> st. n., Gmc. *þakam) lent its vowel to <thetchen> 'to roof over, cover' (OE <þeccan> wk. I, Gmc. *þakjan), which then lent its inlaut back to <thack>. Such a reciprocal trade, while not impossible, is rendered implausible by the chronology, and seems unnecessary anyway. We can understand <þacche> as the regular development of an OE wk. f. *þæcce, from a Gmc. abstract *þakko:n- 'roofing', easily concretized, from a protoform *tognó:n-. The noun <thetche> then has been altered from <þacche> under the influence of the regularly inherited verb <thetch(en)>, and since this altered noun dies out after 1600, it may have been nothing but a hypercorrection of printers which never took root in the spoken language. On the other hand the modern verb <thatch>, a simple denominative, has replaced this inherited verb <thetch>, but there are plenty of similar examples. As with <wacche> and <bacche>, the recognition that the geminate in the form ancestral to <þacche> is due to Kluge's Law, and not to WGmc /j/-gemination, avoids the difficulty of accounting for the missing /j/-umlaut. In this case it spares us the scenario of nouns and verbs in late ME picking each other's pockets for substitute phonemes.


        This might be relevant
        http://www.systranet.com/dictionary/dutch-english/bak
        "receptacle, box, bin"
        Da. bakke "tray"

        de Vries
        bakki 2 m 'kleines fahrzeug' (nur in þula)
        - vgl.
        and. bak, nnl. bak 'schüssel, kübel'
        (hieraus afrz. bac 'kübel; fähre',
        spät. lat. bacca 'wassergefäss';
        Falle, WS 4, 1912, 87)

        Seems also to point to batch being an ovenful.


        Torsten
      • dgkilday57
        ... Instead, I think a Class II weak denominative *bakko:n to make a batch was formed from *bakko:n- batch , and this weak verb interacted with *bakan to
        Message 3 of 5 , Apr 13, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
          >
          > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
          > >
          > > [...]

          Instead, I think a Class II weak denominative *bakko:n 'to make a batch' was formed from *bakko:n- 'batch', and this weak verb interacted with *bakan 'to bake' in different ways as the meanings fell together in the individual languages. In the Low Countries, *bakko:n (later *bakko:jan) prevailed over *bakan. The weak cross *bako:n is represented by ON <baka> and Upper German <bachen>. The strong cross *bakkan competed with the original *bakan in OHG and MHG, and has now prevailed in HG <backen>. In English, *bakan prevailed over *bakko:jan quite early, since the latter is unattested, but ironically the winning verb became weak, with the participle <baken> going obsolete early in the Modern phase. Nevertheless, if my analysis is correct, only English has preserved the noun which generated *bakko:n in the first place.
          >
          > This might be relevant
          > http://www.systranet.com/dictionary/dutch-english/bak
          > "receptacle, box, bin"

          Another sense I found for Du. <bak> (pl. <bakken>) is 'sailor's mess, galley'.

          > Da. bakke "tray"

          I should retract that bit about only English preserving the noun.

          > de Vries
          > bakki 2 m 'kleines fahrzeug' (nur in þula)
          > - vgl.
          > and. bak, nnl. bak 'schüssel, kübel'
          > (hieraus afrz. bac 'kübel; fähre',
          > spät. lat. bacca 'wassergefäss';
          > Falle, WS 4, 1912, 87)
          >
          > Seems also to point to batch being an ovenful.

          On the other hand Varro says "vinum in Hispania bacca" and I have argued elsewhere for a Hispano-Latin derivative *baccarus 'wine-boy, butler, servant on an estate' formed with the atonal suffix *-aro- common in this area, whence *baccara:lia n. pl. 'servants' quarters, rustic shack, and in 9th-cent. Latin texts of Catalonia and S. France <baccalaria> 'peasants' hut' (for the liquid metathesis cf. Spanish <milagro>, <palabra>, etc.). Then by back-formation I get later medieval Latin <bac(c)alari(u)s> 'peasant, tenant farmer, boor, underclassman, bachelor'. This non-IE <bacca> 'wine, wine-bottle, vessel' is in my opinion more likely to underlie those 'vessel' words than Gmc. *bakko:n-.

          DGK
        • dgkilday57
          ... The cat got out of it. I could find no principled way of connecting it with anything else. DGK
          Message 4 of 5 , Apr 13, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:
            >
            > What happened to bag? I was expected it as the next logical sequence
            >
            The cat got out of it. I could find no principled way of connecting it with anything else.

            DGK
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.