Return to Answer

The development of Proto-Germanic ai in the North Germanic languages is very complex. It depends on a number of factors (stressed/unstressed, followed by w, r/R, h etc.) - see e.g. Sandøy 2017

PGmc. ai > Proto-Norse æi (Fulk 2018: 70), which further developed into:

• ǣ (before w) (Heusler 1921: 28);
• ā (before r, h) (this ā further developed into ē in the i-umlaut environment);
• ei (in OWN) or ē (OEN) (Versloot 2017: 285);

In your post, you ask about frǽ (and its variant frjó; Zoega 1926 says that fræ was "sometimes in old MSS. spelt freo or frjó (q.v.), but less rightly").

As you can easily notice, we have w after the diphthong in PGmc, which means PGmc ai developed into æ in Old Norse (see above), cf. Fulk 2018: 70

"In addition, Proto-Norse æi developed to ON æ (i.e., /æː/) before w (which might be lost, §6.14), as in *aiwīn- > OIcel. ævi ‘age’ (cf. Go. aíws < *aiwaz) and hræ ‘corpse’ (cf. Go. hraíw)."

Note: the acute and the macron are used interchangeably here, to indicate length.

The development of Proto-Germanic ai in the North Germanic languages is very complex. It depends on a number of factors (stressed/unstressed, followed by w, r/R, h etc.) - see e.g. Sandøy 2017

PGmc. ai > Proto-Norse æi (Fulk 2018: 70), which further developed into:

• ǣ (before w) (Heusler 1921: 28);
• ā (before r, h) (this ā further developed into ē in the i-umlaut environment);
• ei (in OWN) or ē (OEN) (Versloot 2017: 285);

In your post, you ask about frǽ (and its variant frjó; Zoega 1926 says that fræ was "sometimes in old MSS. spelt freo or frjó (q.v.), but less rightly").

As you can easily notice, we have w after the diphthong in PGmc, which means PGmc ai developed into æ in Old Norse (see above), cf. Fulk 2018: 70

"In addition, Proto-Norse æi developed to ON æ (i.e., /æː/) before w (which might be lost, §6.14), as in *aiwīn- > OIcel. ævi ‘age’ (cf. Go. aíws < *aiwaz) and hræ ‘corpse’ (cf. Go. hraíw)."

Note: the acute and the macron are used interchangeably here, to indicate length.

The development of Proto-Germanic ai in Nordic is very complex. It depends on a number of factors (stressed/unstressed, followed by w, r/R, h etc.) - see e.g. Sandøy 2017

PGmc. ai > Proto-Norse æi (Fulk 2018: 70), which further developed into:

• ǣ (before w) (Heusler 1921: 28);
• ā (before r, h) (this ā further developed into ē in the i-umlaut environment);
• ei (in OWN) or ē (OEN) (Versloot 2017: 285);

In your post, you ask about frǽ (and its variant frjó; Zoega 1926 says that fræ was "sometimes in old MSS. spelt freo or frjó (q.v.), but less rightly").

As you can easily notice, we have w after the diphthong in PGmc, which means PGmc ai developed into æ in Nordic (see above), cf. Fulk 2018: 70

"In addition, Proto-Norse æi developed to ON æ (i.e., /æː/) before w (which might be lost, §6.14), as in *aiwīn- > OIcel. ævi ‘age’ (cf. Go. aíws < *aiwaz) and hræ ‘corpse’ (cf. Go. hraíw)."

Note: the acute and the macron are used interchangeably here, to indicate length.

The development of Proto-Germanic ai in the North Germanic languages is very complex. It depends on a number of factors (stressed/unstressed, followed by w, r/R, h etc.) - see e.g. Sandøy 2017

PGmc. ai > Proto-Norse æi (Fulk 2018: 70), which further developed into:

• ǣ (before w) (Heusler 1921: 28);
• ā (before r, h) (this ā further developed into ē in the i-umlaut environment);
• ei (in OWN) or ē (OEN) (Versloot 2017: 285);

In your post, you ask about frǽ (and its variant frjó; Zoega 1926 says that fræ was "sometimes in old MSS. spelt freo or frjó (q.v.), but less rightly").

As you can easily notice, we have w after the diphthong in PGmc, which means PGmc ai developed into æ in Old Norse (see above), cf. Fulk 2018: 70

"In addition, Proto-Norse æi developed to ON æ (i.e., /æː/) before w (which might be lost, §6.14), as in *aiwīn- > OIcel. ævi ‘age’ (cf. Go. aíws < *aiwaz) and hræ ‘corpse’ (cf. Go. hraíw)."

Note: the acute and the macron are used interchangeably here, to indicate length.

The development of Proto-Germanic ai in Nordic is very complex. It depends on a number of factors (stressed/unstressed, followed by w, r/R, h etc.) - see e.g. Sandøy 2017

PGmc. ai > Proto-Norse æi (Fulk 2018: 70), which further developed into:

• ǣ (before w) (Heusler 1921: 28);
• ā (before r, h) (this ā further developed into ē in the i-umlaut environment);
• ei (in OWN) or ē (OEN) (Versloot 2017: 285);

In your post, you ask about frǽ (and its variant frjó; Zoega 1926 says that fræ was "sometimes in old MSS. spelt freo or frjó (q.v.), but less rightly").

As you can easily notice, we have w after the diphthong in PGmc, which means PGmc ai developed into æ in Nordic (see above), cf. Fulk 2018: 70

"In addition, Proto-Norse æi developed to ON æ (i.e., /æː/) before w (which might be lost, §6.14), as in *aiwīn- > OIcel. ævi ‘age’ (cf. Go. aíws < *aiwaz) and hræ ‘corpse’ (cf. Go. hraíw)."

The development of Proto-Germanic ai in Nordic is very complex. It depends on a number of factors (stressed/unstressed, followed by w, r/R, h etc.) - see e.g. Sandøy 2017

PGmc. ai > Proto-Norse æi (Fulk 2018: 70), which further developed into:

• ǣ (before w) (Heusler 1921: 28);
• ā (before r, h) (this ā further developed into ē in the i-umlaut environment);
• ei (in OWN) or ē (OEN) (Versloot 2017: 285);

In your post, you ask about frǽ (and its variant frjó; Zoega 1926 says that fræ was "sometimes in old MSS. spelt freo or frjó (q.v.), but less rightly").

As you can easily notice, we have w after the diphthong in PGmc, which means PGmc ai developed into æ in Nordic (see above), cf. Fulk 2018: 70

"In addition, Proto-Norse æi developed to ON æ (i.e., /æː/) before w (which might be lost, §6.14), as in *aiwīn- > OIcel. ævi ‘age’ (cf. Go. aíws < *aiwaz) and hræ ‘corpse’ (cf. Go. hraíw)."

Note: the acute and the macron are used interchangeably here, to indicate length.