Talk:blæcce
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Leasnam in topic *blakkjā
*blakkjā[edit]
@Leasnam, if this is from *blakkjā, shouldn't we expect **bleċċe? -- Sokkjō 20:20, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
- Possibly. The vowel is indeed an important consideration, but I feel that the geminate, palatised consonant is more impactful. Compare similar Old English hæċ for development of i-mutated a > æ instead of e. Leasnam (talk) 20:43, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Sokkjō, are you sure a formation in PWG from *blak + *-jā would produce *blakkjā and not *blakjā ? I thought genesis in GEM-PRO might be required for this. (?) Leasnam (talk) 22:56, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
- Absolutely, as we can see this rule being triggered even in Latin borrowings into WG, ex. *unnjā. -- Sokkjō 00:05, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Sokkjō, I don't think this is an adequate example, since this is not from Proto-West Germanic *un- + *-jā; but rather, this is evidence that the word was borrowed earlier as Proto-Germanic *unjǭ then inherited as > *unnjā. Is there perhaps another example ? Leasnam (talk) 02:29, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- LMFAO, sure: *akkjal, *kastannjā, *kulljandr, *wikkjā. -- Sokkjō 03:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Sokkjō, perhaps you missed it. These are more examples of words not formed in PWGmc from a stand-alone [stem] + *-jā: they just show regular West Germanic consonant gemination. I was hoping you would be able to produce soemthing like *smal + *-jā = *smalljā, which would parallel the formation of *blakkjā. None of the examples you provided actually do that. Leasnam (talk) 06:03, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- After second thought it's actually good the way it is. I can live with concluding that Proto-West Germanic *blakjā is the intermediary between PGmc and PWGmc, that later became *blakkjā, and it's not necessary to show an earlier non-geminate *blakjā. By force of habit I always default to the previous stage which is Proto-Germanic, but I suppose that's actually not correct, it's really Early PWGmc. So when I said Proto-Germanic *unjǭ, I should have instead said Early Proto-West Germanic *unjā (which later becomes *unnjā). I'm okay now with how this looks. Leasnam (talk) 06:24, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Sokkjō, perhaps you missed it. These are more examples of words not formed in PWGmc from a stand-alone [stem] + *-jā: they just show regular West Germanic consonant gemination. I was hoping you would be able to produce soemthing like *smal + *-jā = *smalljā, which would parallel the formation of *blakkjā. None of the examples you provided actually do that. Leasnam (talk) 06:03, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- LMFAO, sure: *akkjal, *kastannjā, *kulljandr, *wikkjā. -- Sokkjō 03:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Sokkjō, I don't think this is an adequate example, since this is not from Proto-West Germanic *un- + *-jā; but rather, this is evidence that the word was borrowed earlier as Proto-Germanic *unjǭ then inherited as > *unnjā. Is there perhaps another example ? Leasnam (talk) 02:29, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- Absolutely, as we can see this rule being triggered even in Latin borrowings into WG, ex. *unnjā. -- Sokkjō 00:05, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Sokkjō, are you sure a formation in PWG from *blak + *-jā would produce *blakkjā and not *blakjā ? I thought genesis in GEM-PRO might be required for this. (?) Leasnam (talk) 22:56, 24 April 2023 (UTC)