Reconstruction talk:Proto-West Germanic/kweban
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Holodwig21 in topic Form
Form
[edit]@Holodwig21 OHG attests a regular class 5 strong verb here. On what ground is a j-present reconstructed for PWG? —Rua (mew) 18:12, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Rua: Old Norse and because the previous entry already had be reconstructed as a j-present. Although I wasn't certain if it should be a weak verb or a strong verb. Koebler claimed it was a class 5 strong verb. My uncertainty came from the fact that Kroonen claimed Middle High German erqueben to be from Proto-Germanic *kwēbijaną; so I was confused if Old High German irqueban was at some point strong and then became weak or if it was always weak. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 18:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- If w:Middle High German is any indication, umlauted ā is indicated with the letter æ in MHG. It thus seems that erqueben must have a short vowel, and can't come from *kwēbijaną. It must reflect a form with either e or umlauted a. But umlauted a would require a j-present, which would also cause gemination because the syllable is light. So if this came from *kwabbjan, then what happened to the gemination in OHG? —Rua (mew) 19:02, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Rua: Give that Old High German irqueban doesn't possess germination, I'm guessing that there was no *kwabbjan. So from my understanding of you explanation this verb should be Proto-West Germanic *kweban. If this is the case, then I think Proto-Germanic *kwabjaną, should be changed into a weak verb that is derived from Proto-Germanic *kwebaną. While I did say I based this reconstruction on Old Norse, I actually made a mistake as I though Old Norse kōf, kvōf (“smoke, fume”) to be a denominative of *kwabjaną. Koebler gives Old Norse kvefja, kefja as weak, as does Kroonen. If OHG is 5 class strong, then we can assume *kwabjaną to be a causative of *kwebaną. Proto-Germanic *kwēbijaną could be explained as being a denominative derived from *gʷeh₂bʰ-; with *kwebaną being from Proto-Indo-European *gʷebʰ-. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 21:57, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Do you want to make the entries? —Rua (mew) 11:32, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Rua: Yup, I'll make them right away. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 19:00, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Do you want to make the entries? —Rua (mew) 11:32, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Rua: Give that Old High German irqueban doesn't possess germination, I'm guessing that there was no *kwabbjan. So from my understanding of you explanation this verb should be Proto-West Germanic *kweban. If this is the case, then I think Proto-Germanic *kwabjaną, should be changed into a weak verb that is derived from Proto-Germanic *kwebaną. While I did say I based this reconstruction on Old Norse, I actually made a mistake as I though Old Norse kōf, kvōf (“smoke, fume”) to be a denominative of *kwabjaną. Koebler gives Old Norse kvefja, kefja as weak, as does Kroonen. If OHG is 5 class strong, then we can assume *kwabjaną to be a causative of *kwebaną. Proto-Germanic *kwēbijaną could be explained as being a denominative derived from *gʷeh₂bʰ-; with *kwebaną being from Proto-Indo-European *gʷebʰ-. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 21:57, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- If w:Middle High German is any indication, umlauted ā is indicated with the letter æ in MHG. It thus seems that erqueben must have a short vowel, and can't come from *kwēbijaną. It must reflect a form with either e or umlauted a. But umlauted a would require a j-present, which would also cause gemination because the syllable is light. So if this came from *kwabbjan, then what happened to the gemination in OHG? —Rua (mew) 19:02, 27 January 2020 (UTC)