> I'm working on adding standard forms to the list of A-S > men's names I'm taking from Tengvik, and I have a few > questions about my identifications. Names are the left are > the actual forms found, names on the right (with question > marks) are my identifications with the standard forms, > taken also from Tengvik. It would help if you gave page numbers; Tengvik usually has other useful information that can help with the identification (including the rest of the name). > Byrhsige Beorhtsige ? Yes. > Clacc Klak ? Probably OEScand (ON ), or an Anglo-Scand borrowing ; evidence for a native OE is pretty shaky. > Eadr{ae}d Ealdr{ae}d ? No, . And here we run into a problem: it's customary in normalized forms to mark vowel length, either with a macron or as the OED does, with an acute accent. This is no problem for the prototheme, which is really , but the <{ae}> of the deuterotheme is also long, and there's no good way to handle this in HTML. These length marks are purely editorial, so it isn't a catastrophe to omit them, but they are part of the normalized form. For the record I'm going to mark them here with colons, a standard phonetic symbol for length, so this is really . > Earwig Earnwig ? ; yes, most probably. > Eastan Ealhstan ? Unlikely. I'd go with . > Merefinn Merewine ? Pretty definitely not. Uncertain. The best suggestion is that it's from ON , where is an ON personal name, and is a byname meaning 'of M{o|}/ri'. It also occurs (as ) in a Northants. entry in DB, so if this is the right etymology, the compound may have existed as a name in its own right. > Siraf Sigre/fr ? OSw . (I don't entirely trust as an ODan form, I'd rather not try for one myself, and the name apparently didn't exist in OWScand.) > Also, one man, has > identified as "Celtic (Welsh/Cornish)". Not on p.161, which is where I found the citation. It identifies as Cornish, giving the Old Breton cognate . Better yet, it gives the source as something to do with Bodmin, which is in Cornwall, and identifies the county as '(Co)', which is Cornwall. > I'm assuming is also of that strain. I don't > want to list them just as "Celtic" in the language section > of the table, and listing it as "Welsh/Cornish" seems > waffly to me, like I don't know which it is (which is > true). Would it be misleading just to identify the name as > "Welsh"? The safe option is to identify it as Brythonic. Given that it's from the Bodmin manumissions, however, you might as well call it Cornish. (You'll find a brief discussion in Tangwystyl's article; it also appears in the same source as .) By the way, there is no prototheme <{AE}gel->: it's a late OE spelling of <{AE}{dh}el->. Thus, the normalized form of your third entry is <{AE}{dh}elno:{dh}>, and the next one is <{AE}{dh}elwine>. Your entry for <{AE}lfeges> 973 x 987 should have a double asterisk; it's a genitive case (and says so, at least in the citation on p.149). The normalized form of <{AE}lfelm> c.1060 is <{AE}lfhelm>, not <{AE}lfelm>. There are quite a few more errors in the last column, but I'll leave them for later. Talan At 10:18 PM -0600 4/4/03, Sara L Friedemann wrote: >I'm working on adding standard forms to the list of A-S men's names >I'm taking from Tengvik, and I have a few questions about my >identifications. Names are the left are the actual forms found, names >on the right (with question marks) are my identifications with the >standard forms, taken also from Tengvik. > >This is just a start of the questions, I'll have others (mostly >concerning back-forming to the nominative from a genitive form) coming >soon. > >Byrhsige Beorhtsige ? >Clacc Klak ? >Eadr{ae}d Ealdr{ae}d ? >Earwig Earnwig ? >Eastan Ealhstan ? >Merefinn Merewine ? Depending on context, consider also the Welsh masculine name . >Siraf Sigre/fr ? > >Also, one man, has identified >as "Celtic (Welsh/Cornish)". I'm assuming is also of that >strain. I don't want to list them just as "Celtic" in the language >section of the table, and listing it as "Welsh/Cornish" seems waffly >to me, like I don't know which it is (which is true). Would it be >misleading just to identify the name as "Welsh"? Yes, it would be misleading -- it's from the Bodmin manumissions, so it would be better to call it Cornish. See my article on this source to see if I've got anything else useful on it. Tangwystyl -- ***** Heather Rose Jones hrjones@socrates.berkeley.edu ***** >>Merefinn Merewine ? > Depending on context, consider also the Welsh masculine > name . From Hampshire, and father of {AE}lfwine. Talan >> There are quite a few more errors in the last column, but >> I'll leave them for later. > Yes: Please leave them for later. I am not ready to have > that column commented on beyond the questions that I > posted to the list last night. Much of that has not yet > been double checked by me, so you'll save yourself a lot > of effort, I'm sure, if you don't worry what's on the > webpage until I ask for comments on it, and just stick > with the specific questions I ask on the list for the > moment. Too late for that: I've already done a large chunk of the list. It's not at all a straightforward task, either, since Tengvik has some errors of his own. I'm pretty sure that you don't have the resources to deal with all of them, and I suspect that you may accept some of them without realizing that there might be a problem. If you want to take a crack at them first on your own, just say so, and I'll hold off posting comments, but I intend to continue doing my own commentary, if only because in places it will be more complete than what is likely to end up on the web page, and I may want it for future reference. Talan -- > > Also, one man, has > > identified as "Celtic (Welsh/Cornish)". >well call it Cornish. (You'll find a brief discussion in >Tangwystyl's article; it also appears in the same source as >.) I don't believe it actually occurs in both spellings in the original (but I'd have to check my notes) -- rather that some editors have transcribed it with {dh} and some with {th}. Tangwystyl -- -- >>(You'll find a brief discussion in Tangwystyl's article; >>it also appears in the same source as .) > I don't believe it actually occurs in both spellings in > the original (but I'd have to check my notes) -- rather > that some editors have transcribed it with {dh} and some > with {th}. Dunno; I just noticed that you have both versions in the article. Talan