2

I would like to find a list of borrowings illustrating the reflexes in (proto-)Germanic of Latin long and short vowels. In particular I would like to find substantiation to the standard claim that it reflects long and short vowels differently. This statement would be correct in relation to qualitatively distinct pairs such as videt != vīdit that in most of Romance likewise remain distinct, but the pairs that in North-Western Late Latin/proto-Romance must be described as contrasting primarily in terms of length are the vowels of vir and vēr, and these ultimately merge with the rise of Open Syllable Lengthening.

Here's an example of the kind of evidence I'm looking for, from Stifter 2009:

In words that were borrowed into Germanic or its dialects from Latin in the imperial period, Lat. ā is not reflected by *ō but by the new *ā by default, e.g. OHG phāl 'stake' <- pālus, OHG strāzza 'street' <- strāta, OHG kāsi 'cheese' <- cāseus, the OHG agentive suffix -āri <- ārius. Cases where Lat. ā seems to be reflected by Gmc. *ӑ are actually borrowings from Vulgar Latin with pretonic shortening, e.g. OHG ratih, retih 'radish' <- VLat. rӑdīc- < Lat. rādīx 'root'.

I would like some sort of a reference - if not a dedicated discussion then at least a list of borrowings - showing in which environments and at what periods of borrowing the Late Latin vowel length contrast between /a/ and /ā/, /į/ and /ē/, /ę/ and /ae/, /ų/ and /ō/, and perhaps /ǫ/ and /au/ is reflected in Germanic languages.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.