|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390 |
Apostrophes are important.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
I suspect the 'r' entered as a non-rhotic spelling variation. Sherbet was one of Australia's most successful 1970s pop band ( Sherbet). Their music was as kitch as most everything else in the 70s. Or kitsch if you prefer.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
Apostrophes are important. Your right, they are arent they? Or are they? Wouldnt it be terrible without em? As Anu points out, Dictionaries follow language, not the other way round. It won't be too long before they list words without the accustomed apostrophes as acceptable spellings. You're will become your and the apostrophied (apostrophised?) version will become archaic. You just wait and see.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
I suspect the 'r' entered as a non-rhotic spelling variation.
I believe that non-rhoticism is much more recent than the 400 year b.p. date given for the introduction ofn sherbet and its almost immediate variation, sherbert. What I wanna know is, when it came into English did we know to change the French or Italian, whichever it was, initial S back to the original Arabic SH or was that just some ignorant, lazy solecism? Language Log has given a date for the start of non-rhoticism, but I couldn't find it. Or maybe it was Nuncle zhd.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390 |
I suspect the 'r' entered as a non-rhotic spelling variation.
I believe that non-rhoticism is much more recent than the 400 year b.p. date given for the introduction ofn sherbet and its almost immediate variation, sherbert. Wikipedia has this: The earliest traces of a loss of /r/ in English are found in the environment before /s/ in spellings from the mid-15th century: the Oxford English Dictionary reports bace for earlier barse (today "bass", the fish) in 1440 and passel for parcel in 1468. In the 1630s, the word juggernaut is first attested, which represents the Hindi word jagannāth, meaning "lord of the universe". LanguageLog does have this: The traditional account (as e.g. in (Richard) Bailey 1996 and Lass 1992) was that loss of postvocalic /r/ in England was a 17th and 18th century phenomenon. Thus r-lessness would have been widespread (but not universal) during the period when English speakers emigrated to North America, and thus settlement patterns are a likely source of influence. However, recent research suggests that "... most of England was still rhotic ... at the level of urban and lower-middle-class speech in the middle of the nineteenth century, and that extensive spreading of the loss of rhoticity is something that has occurred subsequently..." (Peter Trudgill, "A Window on the Past: "Colonial Lag" and New Zealand Evidence for the Phonology of Nineteenth-Century English". American Speech 74(3) 1999).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
In the 1630s, the word juggernaut is first attested, which represents the Hindi word jagannāth, meaning "lord of the universe". This example of an unpronounced R being put in a word not previously known in English is consistent with The Pook's conjecture that the second R in sherbert was a result of non-rhoticism. The earliest citation for the sherbert spelling in the B&M OED is from 1675: We were severall times treated with sherbert of lemmons. Thanks, latishya. Incidentally, the OED also lists variations with the first syllable spelled ser-, cer-, and sar-. I'm still wondering about the initial sh.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
I suspect the 'r' entered as a non-rhotic spelling variation.
I believe that non-rhoticism is much more recent than the 400 year b.p. date given for the introduction ofn sherbet and its almost immediate variation, sherbert. What I wanna know is, when it came into English did we know to change the French or Italian, whichever it was, initial S back to the original Arabic SH or was that just some ignorant, lazy solecism? Language Log has given a date for the start of non-rhoticism, but I couldn't find it. Or maybe it was Nuncle zhd. It's hard to see how it could be a deliberate rhotic spelling. Why would someone deliberately add an 'r' sound, thus making it harder to pronounce, not easier? It has to be spelling, not a real phonetic addition of a consonant, surely? It is probably a non-rhotic attempt to change the value of the 'e' to something more like a long schwa.
Last edited by The Pook; 05/06/08 11:49 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
Do you mean non-rhotic spelling? Surely people have been speaking dialects with or without the 'r' sounds in certain words for longer than that?
Certainly, in some circumstances the R has dropped out of pronunciations, but it doesn't really count as non-rhoticism. The missing R in speak is an example. I think it's a matter of an R after a bilabial or labio-dental that disappears. Modern examples are liberry, Febyuary, and infastructure. That doesn't really count as non-rhoticism. And, yes, probably there are dialects all over the world where post-vocalic Rs have disappeared. But this is Modern Standard English we're talking about and it's all getting too complicated to keep up at the moment. I've got my day job to go to and it's getting late.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210 |
someone will likely have an idear.
time to pahk my cah in the gararge.
formerly known as etaoin...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290 |
Apostrophes are important.
No, they ain't. They're a sugar coating. Nice, but hardly necessary or important.
Wouldnt it be terrible without em?
The use of apostrophes is, in the main, a late 17th or early 18 century phenomenon. Like many usage choices, which some dream cannot be done without, the language managed quite well without. As Mr ThePook jocularly shows, most spelling and usage infelicities have little to do with the intended message getting through. In fact, I've always maintained that if you can correct a sentence, it's not in real need of emendation. That's why we can understand Shakespeare and Chaucer in spite of the chaotic spelling and lack of punctuation.
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
Do you mean non-rhotic spelling? Surely people have been speaking dialects with or without the 'r' sounds in certain words for longer than that?
Certainly, in some circumstances the R has dropped out of pronunciations, but it doesn't really count as non-rhoticism. The missing R in speak is an example. I think it's a matter of an R after a bilabial or labio-dental that disappears. Modern examples are liberry, Febyuary, and infastructure. That doesn't really count as non-rhoticism. And, yes, probably there are dialects all over the world where post-vocalic Rs have disappeared. But this is Modern Standard English we're talking about and it's all getting too complicated to keep up at the moment. I've got my day job to go to and it's getting late. Have a nice day! Mine's over and I'm about to try to get to bed early for a change. The above is just a sideline anyway (what isn't here!) - the main point I'm making is that the original word DIDN'T have a spoken 'r' in the second syllable when it came into the language, so it is extremely unlikely for the 'r' sound to have been added, since, as you point out here, they tend to elide rather than appear (sorry, elide is not the right word, that applies to vowels, doesn't it, but the word for consonants slipping out eludes my old brain right now). So it must be a non-rhotic spelling variant.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
That's why we can understand Shakespeare and Chaucer in spite of the chaotic spelling and lack of punctuation. Well, Shakespeare at least. YOU might understand Chaucer easily. Personally I only understand Chaucer with difficulty, after reading the sentence three times. Not because of the spelling and punctuation, but because his vocabulary, usage, grammar, pronunciation, etc is probably more different from Shakespeare than Shakespeare is from us.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290 |
the original word DIDN'T have a spoken 'r' in the second syllable when it came into the language, so it is extremely unlikely for the 'r' sound to have been added, since, as you point out here
I haven't looked at the citations, but how do we know this? All sorts of things happen to words after they've been borrowed. Middle English parfit became Present-Day English perfect. Somehow, I doubt it has anything to do with rhotic and non-rhotic dialects or orthography.
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
the original word DIDN'T have a spoken 'r' in the second syllable when it came into the language, so it is extremely unlikely for the 'r' sound to have been added, since, as you point out here
I haven't looked at the citations, but how do we know this? All sorts of things happen to words after they've been borrowed. Middle English parfit became Present-Day English perfect. Somehow, I doubt it has anything to do with rhotic and non-rhotic dialects or orthography. True, strange things happen in English. But, since both parfit and perfect have an 'r' in them I don't quite get your point there? But then it is late here and I'm probably missing the obvious. I still think it's far less likely for an 'r' sound (as opposed to merely the letter) between a vowel and a final consonant to be added than to be subtracted. Assuming the original assertion that it's not there in the Arabic word is correct - I never checked that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Er--can y'all 'splain to me what this refers to, please?
Apostrophes are important.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390 |
Er--can y'all 'splain to me what this refers to, please?
Apostrophes are important.
Have a look at the subject line.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 10,592 Likes: 1
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 10,592 Likes: 1 |
I would surmise that Anu has written and posted more than one column (haven't taken/made time to look) and that there's another, subsequent to the one fingered in the index post here, that uses the phrase "Apostrophes are important."
Has anyone found it?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
Er--can y'all 'splain to me what this refers to, please?
Apostrophes are important.
Have a look at the subject line. huh?! Anu is on Encarta.. Anu's on Encarta. this is not a possessive, singular or plural.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 10,592 Likes: 1
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 10,592 Likes: 1 |
Aha. Missed it the first time 'round. You're right - it's not a possessive. It's a contraction. And it is indeed important here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
Aha. Missed it the first time 'round. You're right - it's not a possessive. It's a contraction. And it is indeed important here. Once again proving that being correct does not necessarily eliminate ambiguity.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290 |
since both parfit and perfect have an 'r' in them I don't quite get your point there?
Sorry, I wasn't referring to the r in parfit, but where the c /k/ came from. It's not there in parfit, though it was in the earlier Latin perfectus, and that's why the letter was inserted, silently at first, and subsequently modifying the pronunciation. There are two ways words come into a language: either they are inherited from the earlier version of the language, or they are borrowed from a different language. In the former case, sound changes tend mostly to be regular, but in the latter, anything may happen, and often does.
I was in a hurry to miss the brunt of commuter traffic this morning, and was a bit abrupt in my posting.
To try to get a handle on what happened, we'd probably have to do the following: (1) see what any earlier researchers had disclosed; (2) track down the early citations to determine the actual MS spellings (and not the sometimes corrected spelling of diplomatic texts); (3) determine whether it only came in through one source (sometimes these words come in through several, unrelated borrows); and (4) compare the sound change with other, similar, and contemporary borrowings. That would be a beginning anyway.
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290 |
YOU might understand Chaucer easily.
By you, I meant not ThePook (nand me), but scholars and others who read Middle English authors regularly.
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
Funny thing and a small hang up of mine is that Middle English stands relatively so close to modern Dutch, with the addition of the French words that are in the M.E., that in spite of missing some words, I can fairly well follow the whole story.
Example: 2 sentences from the Knight's Tale
Middle English : Ther was a duc that highte theseus;
Modern Dutch : Er was een hertog die heette Theseus
Modern english: There was a duke whose name was Theseus:
Middle English: And eek hir yonge suster emelye.
Modern Dutch: En ook haar jonge zuster Emilie
Modern English: And, too, her younger sister, Emily.
The modern Dutch is a correct translation of the modern english.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
Is hertog the same as the name Hartog?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Middle English : Ther was a duc that highte theseus;
Modern Dutch : Er was een hertog die heette Theseus
Modern english: There was a duke whose name was Theseus:
Middle English: And eek hir yonge suster emelye.
Modern Dutch: En ook haar jonge zuster Emilie
Modern English: And, too, her younger sister, Emily.
Wow, that's really cool--thanks for the effort! :-)
Once again proving that being correct does not necessarily eliminate ambiguity. Indeed. I was wondering where I'd gone wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290 |
Is hertog the same as the name Hartog?Probably, as it's a Dutch name. Cf. German Herzog is the same as Dutch hertog, both of which mean literally 'army-leader': Heer 'army' and ziehen 'to draw, pull': German Zug 'train', English tug, tow, Latin dux, ducis, 'leader' (whence English duke): all from PIE * deuk- 'to lead' ( link).
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390 |
Once again proving that being correct does not necessarily eliminate ambiguity. Indeed. I was wondering where I'd gone wrong.
Nobody said anything about you being wrong. I think my English learning includes now learning that English learners shouldn't try little jokes here because they will be dissected and dessicated in the process.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
Nobody said anything about you being wrong. I think my English learning includes now learning that English learners shouldn't try little jokes here because they will be dissected and dessicated in the process. We might dissect you but I don't think we'll bother drying you out for later consumption...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
Is hertog the same as the name Hartog?Probably, as it's a Dutch name. Cf. German Herzog is the same as Dutch hertog, both of which mean literally 'army-leader': Heer 'army' and ziehen 'to draw, pull': German Zug 'train', English tug, tow, Latin dux, ducis, 'leader' (whence English duke): all from PIE * deuk- 'to lead' ( link). A whole legion of Hartog, Hertog, Hertogs, Den Hertog / Hertogh, and more spelling variations . Maybe when Napoleon Bonaparte forced the population to choose a family name other than "son of "or "daughter of" ( Jan Pieter's zoon Coen) some people chose to promote themselves to Duke, (Hertog) or Count (De Graaf) or King( De Koning). Others took this new law as a joke and came out with ridiculous names , such as "Naaktgeboren" (born nude)"Nooitgedacht"(never thought of) and more nonsensical stuff; still in use till this day.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
How fascinating. Hartog must have been around as a family name much earlier, though, since Dirk Hartog 'discovered' the West coast of what would later become Australia in 1616. Dirk Hartog
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
Ahaaaa! It was a little Tasmanian trap then.  O.K. The Hartogs or Den Hartogs must be ligitimate old names. The old Sea Heroes's noblesse. The rest of my post is true. X me heart....! Quite some people have inherited those mockery names. (I did say maybe for the Hartog name.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
No, the trap was of your making. I asked the question before you said anything about the made up names.
Tasmania is of course named after another Dutchman. And before it was called Tasmania it was called van Diemen's Land (he was the governor of the East Indies when Tasman discovered the island). And Australia was first called "New Holland" of course. So if history had taken a slightly different turn, or Captain Cook had not been such a good navigator, I might be speaking Dutch instead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390 |
No, the trap was of your making. I asked the question before you said anything about the made up names.
Tasmania is of course named after another Dutchman. And before it was called Tasmania it was called van Diemen's Land (he was the governor of the East Indies when Tasman discovered the island). and the islands to your east are still stuck with the dutch name Tasman gave them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956 |
and the islands to your east are still stuck with the dutch name Tasman gave them. Separated by the Tasman sea. However, the first European name for New Zealand was Staten Landt. Later changed to Nova Zeelandia, after the Dutch province of Zeeland.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
No, the trap was of your making. I asked the question before you said anything about the made up names.
Tasmania is of course named after another Dutchman. And before it was called Tasmania it was called van Diemen's Land (he was the governor of the East Indies when Tasman discovered the island). and the islands to your east are still stuck with the dutch name Tasman gave them. Better than the cumbersome title Captain Cook gave to the east coast of Australia, and which one of our states still bears - New South Wales. At one time the whole colony was known as this, then van Dieman's land was settled in 1804, then one by one the other colonies (later states) peeled off. New Zealand is mentioned in the Australian constitution as a potential member of the new Federation of former colonies that became Australia in 1901. They were invited to join but declined. Any time they want to join they are welcome. Australians regard them as the 8th state anyway, and most of them live near Bondi beach in Sydney.
Last edited by The Pook; 05/08/08 07:42 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
Bran, do you know who Staten was? since NYC also had a Staten land, (now still staten island, and home to new dorp--now just a community name, but the first dutch settlement in NYC (they moved to manhattan a few years later.)
newdorp is a pretty simple name, but there are several newtown's on US east coast. (in NYC Newtown is newtown (not nue/tun (like the cookie)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Speaking of context [cross-threading e], while standing in the kitchen cooking breakfast this morning, I finally got the "little joke". Bless your heart--on this board Anu means one person and that's all, Sugar.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 390 |
Speaking of context [cross-threading e], while standing in the kitchen cooking breakfast this morning, I finally got the "little joke". Bless your heart--on this board Anu means one person and that's all, Sugar. I was not thinking of more than one Anu when I made my post. I was think of a singular object.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 876
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 876 |
Maybe Jackie knows his cousin, Uranus...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
I think the Staten - things come from the Staten-Generaal. (maybe when there was not a particular person to be honored, they just used parliament as a label)
Staten Island:
The first European who saw the island was Giovanni de Verrazano which in 1524 came along. Somewhat later Henry Hudson came on the island and founded a Dutch trading post. He named the island Staaten Eylandt, the Estates-General (Staten-Generaal),Dutch parliament.
So Staten, form Parliament.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,421
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
805
guests, and
3
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
