@ChronHib I have a question for you, if that's alright. For my PhD I have looked at some Irish genealogies from some MSS, specifically ones with some very old OIr (TCD MS H.2.7 for example), but I have been told by two people that this archaic lang can't be seen as early
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @AdmiralHip
Hi, I would have to look at them to be able to give a specific judgment. Where are they published? In CGH? Generally speaking, I would say that people in the 10-12 cent would not have been able to artificially archaise in such a way that we wouldn't be able to notice it.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ChronHib
It’s not in CGH but the archaisms were noted by Ó Corráin in his Clavis Litterarum: the example I can give off the top of my head is the pre-syncope form of Anflath being Anblomath and an early hypocoristic form of Brion: Do Brio. They appear twice in the MSS
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @ChronHib
One is in an unedited section but Anblamath appears in the genealogical miscellany edited by M.E. Dobbs in ZCP. Also I know
@cyocum a bit, although with this particular example I am a bit in the dark on as I was never able to ask Prof Ó Corráin about.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @ChronHib
I would agree with
@ChronHib but if you could send me the references via email, I would be happy to have a closer look. I cannot promise answers but I will give it my best shot
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
When I am in my office tomorrow I’ll send the passages along, I have them there somewhere.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.