Reconstruction talk:Proto-Germanic/Þunraz

*Þunaraz

@Mårtensås, what's the basis of your *Þunaraz reconstructions? – Sokkjō 20:37, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

The attestation of a second vowel in all West Germanic descendants, even the early Runic Nordendorf Wigidonar. The shared Northwest Germanic form would be *Þunaraʀ (OE, OS) ~ *Þonaraʀ (OHG, ON), then with regular loss of *-aʀ in WGmc (*Þonar, *Þunar), whereas in Proto-Norse this *Þonaraʀ became *Þonraʀ, after which nasal assimilation (Þǭraʀ /Þõːraʀ/; cf. Proto-Germanic *unseraz > Proto-Norse *onsaraʀ > Old Norse órr (“our”) */õːrː/) and then syncope (*/Þõːrʀ/ > Old Norse Þórr /Þõːrː/). ᛙᛆᚱᛐᛁᚿᛌᛆᛌ ᛭ Proto-Norsing ᛭ Ask me anything 21:22, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

@Mårtensås, the West Germanic forms can be regularly derived from *Þunr, see *fōdr, *hleuþr, etc. I can't speak for the Norse. – Sokkjō 21:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Why do you say that this epenthesis happened after PWGmc? It's in all the supposed descendants so shouldn't it be in the reconstructed Proto-language? ᛙᛆᚱᛐᛁᚿᛌᛆᛌ ᛭ Proto-Norsing ᛭ Ask me anything 22:06, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Since ᚹᛁᚷᛁᚦᛟᚾᚨᚱ throws an error, shouldn't it just be fixed? We have OHG runic inscriptions and I think the dictionary should be able to represent them also in descendant tables. ᛙᛆᚱᛐᛁᚿᛌᛆᛌ ᛭ Proto-Norsing ᛭ Ask me anything 22:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Epenthesis? *Þunr = *Þunr̥ = *Þunur = *Þunir. It's all just different realizations of /r̥/ in WG. Deal with ᚹᛁᚷᛁᚦᛟᚾᚨᚱ however you want, just so it doesn't throw an error. 🤷 --– Sokkjō 07:36, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

.,

@Mårtensås, is OHG ᚦᛟᚾᚨᚱ attested on its own, or only in ᚹᛁᚷᛁᚦᛟᚾᚨᚱ? – Sokkjō 23:21, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

There are several places (Þórsdrápa 2.2, Hymiskviða 23.2, Hymiskviða 28.4) where the manuscripts have the usual Þor(r) but (especially in Þórsdrápa) the metric structure implies an extra syllable, with the best solution being a poetic disyllabic nominative Þonar(r). So the nominative seems to have been *Þunaraz originally, and the medial syncope only happened in e. g. the dative *Þunarai > ON *Þóri, but was then analogically extended to the nominative. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

OHG thonar supports this reconstruction, because *þunraz would have yielded ˣthundar, compare *timra- > OHG *zimbar. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 00:17, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

So Sokkjō is wrong: the West Germanic words cannot be regularly derived from a reconstruction with *-nr-. That said, the Proto-Norse reconstructions (at least the syncopated one) are probably not correct, either. I think *þonarz (with final syncope in a Proto-Norse word with more than two syllables) is correct. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 00:22, 11 February 2024 (UTC)