[gothic-l] Re: 'namna' is correct
- jdm31-@... wrote:
> Concerning James:your post, but neither do I have anything interesting to say about it]
> Apparently, [SNIP, I do not contovert anything in the majority of
> As for Jason, in Greek the intitial iota could have been the vowel--
> followed by the /j/, Latin would have simply made this /j-/ like the y
> in yellow. Latin I and Greek iota were commonly used to represent the
> consonantal /j-/ when followed by a vowel. Modern Latin or Romance
> languages changed this to the /dj-/ quality rather comparatively late
> toward the last two centuries of the first millenium. Spanish speakersI know this story off course, my point about Iason is NOT the
orthography, though. My point was that since the name occurs in poetry
(both Greek and Latin) we know that the i was pronounced as a VOWEL in
this particular name (at least in the formal situation of a poem)
However, it seems to me likely that colloquially it was pronounced
CONSONENTALLY as i was in many other words and names, since it yields a
j- in other languages, and the consonental i- regularly does this.
Contrast names like Io (not Jo) and so on.
Note, of course, that Jason's fater was Æson, which is simply a
metathesis of his name when written in Greek- IASÔN/AISÔN
> apparently had a hard time keeping up with the Italian fashions inDiego/Iago I get, but are Juan and Jose borrowed from Italian?? I
> pronunciation for we find Diego/Iago for Iacobus/Giacomo and Juan and
> Jose for Iohannes/Giovanni and Iosephus/Giuseppe. French was probably
assumed they were just the Spanish outcomes of those names.
Though ingluence of Giuseppe sure explains why Pepe is a nickname for
> first in changing the pronunciation of initial consonantal i.a
> Would not Karls (with a non palatalized k-) be a likely candidate for
> Gothic form of Charles/Carl?It sounds more likely to me, but then I don't know the first thing
about this subject and I'm just going on sound ;)
> Diego/Iago I get, but are Juan and Jose borrowed from Italian?? ILatin was centered in Italian Rome. Latin speech was always judged by
> assumed they were just the Spanish outcomes of those names.
> Though ingluence of Giuseppe sure explains why Pepe is a nickname for
the Roman standard. Modern Italian is considered the closest Romance
Language descendent of the ancient Latin even counting the archaism of
IOSEPHUS was probably pronounced /"Yo-SEP-hus"/ at first, then later
IOSEPHE (vocative) "Yo-SE-pe" and variants in Yu-SE-pe and /Yu-SEP-pe/
then finally /Dju-SEP-pe/ "Giuseppe." PH /p+h/ was originally
distinguished from PH /f/. Late Latin still had an influence on the
provinces and took their fashions from Rome until the Latin culture
gradually was established in provincial cities.
after the Roman empire, and during Carolus Magnus time, the vain attempt
to keep Latin was lost and an uphill battle -- something like to trying
to impose Elizabethan--Shakespearean and Authorized Biblical King James
English on modern North Americans and peoples of the United Kingdom.
> > Would not Karls (with a non palatalized k-) be a likely candidate forIf not Karls then perharps Kairls?
> > Gothic form of Charles/Carl?
> It sounds more likely to me, but then I don't know the first thing
> about this subject and I'm just going on sound ;)
I assume that no one has found the cognate word in Gothic.
It seems to me that given what was said about the origin of the
name/noun Karl/Ceorl on the others' postings, we have a divergence
between a palatal and non-palatal k- in protoGermanic.
What would be the Gothic equivalents of:
Indeed, would this not be imposing a projection of an Icelandic Norse
social system onto the Goths, whose own social system was may have been
similar in arrangement but probably different in details and