Re: Linguists and the words on KRS


"Seppo Renfors" <Renfors@xxxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet
news:42CC6515.43B506D5@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> Kjetil Rå Hauge wrote:
> >
> > On 05-07-05 12:31, in article oktye.28639$d5.181786@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
"IEJ"
> > <Inger_ejohansson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > "Seppo Renfors" <Renfors@xxxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet
> > > news:42C9D4AB.80C9F130@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [snip]
> >
> > >
> > > Alan's knowledge of Medieval Swedish is slim. If he is better in
Medieval
> > > Norwegian, I have no idea about, but.....
> > >>
> > >> It has been demonstrated by Inger to exist in the correct era, but
not
> > >> only by her - IIRC Terry did too!
> > >
> > > "thæn fornempde akar at hemble (1) fori hwars mans tiltala . "
> > > 1st November 1371 Linköping. origin parchment RA 0101
> > >
> > > Inger E
> >
> > It is the plural that is under discussion. This "mans" is the regular
> > genitive singular and is irrelevant to the point.

What the distingueshed Norwegian doesn't seem to understand is that 'hwars
mans tiltala' has an 's' put on 'hwar' which wouldn't be there if it didn't
say that 'mans' was a plural noun. If it had been 'hwar' written in other
contemporary texts where the distingueshed Norwegian's opion might be more
up to date, in other words if it had been 'hwar mans'
observe that in the example to which I refered 's' had been added to both
'hwar' and 'man'.
but of course those who aren't familiar with reading Medieval Swedish
documents aren't aware that Wessén gave an example where manz/manss were
plural + genitive and thus that my earlier example was valid as well....

Inger E
>
> Isn't that interesting the ENGLISH version is being claimed - while
> being rejected by another. So what happened to the apostrophe? :-)
>
> --
> SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
> misled.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Linguists and the words on KRS
    ... >> say that 'mans' was a plural noun. ... If it had been 'hwar' written in other ... > Alan Crozier ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Linguists and the words on KRS
    ... >>> genitive singular and is irrelevant to the point. ... > What the distingueshed Norwegian doesn't seem to understand is that 'hwars ... > say that 'mans' was a plural noun. ... If it had been 'hwar' written in other ...
    (sci.archaeology)