@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
Can you give me the precise reference to Ó Corráin's Clavis? I would certainly follow his word in such matters. I know that he believed that some genealogies were very early, i.e. early 7th cent (which I find very exciting). I am not sure about the Anflath/Anblomath question...
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ChronHib @AdmiralHip
Anflath (Anbloth in CGH?) looks like negative an- + flath- (=flaith?). No syncope would be expected there. Also I don't see how Anblomath would turn into Anflath by syncope. It would be good to know what etymology is thought to underly this name.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ChronHib @AdmiralHip
Anblamath corresponds to Ogam ANAVLAMATTIAS (CIIC 124). And yes, Anblamath looks unsyncopated, it should rather be Anbalmath with regular syncope. The second of the five As of ANAVLAMATTIAS, by the way, is just epenthetic, i.e. doesn't count for syncope.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ChronHib
I’m reciting his footnote from Clavis from memory, I know Damian McManus does not agree with it. I don’t recall a page from the top of my head but I believe it is the first volume, one of the initial footnotes in the introduction.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
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.