G+ LoME Archive
Mar 08, 2015 (17:36)
, "glove", inspired after the English etymology of "glove" Proto-Germanic *ga- “collective and associative prefix” + Proto-Germanic *lōfô “flat of the hand, palm”) and the Scandinavian languages for the words "handske" and "vante" (etymologically "hand" + "shoe" and "wind, wrap" respectively).
Mar 08, 2015 (17:57)
I like it. S
is supposed to be an archaic word (VT47:6), so a likely origin would be an OS compound
(Etym:WED) or some earlier construction. This obscures the link between this word and "hand" (usually S
), which adds a nice bit of realism.
However, I think that the diphthong [au] in
would have been preserved in the OS compound, and thereafter would have developed into [o] as was usual in polysyllables. Compare with
"wrist = hand-link" of similar origin (VT47:6). So maybe instead S
Mar 08, 2015 (18:44)
Yes, it's probably better. My thought was maw + gwedh ==> maw-wedh and then that the "w-w" assimilated into a single "w".
Mar 08, 2015 (19:14)
I can't rule out the "w-w" assimilation either. Semi-vowels like
tended to slip back and forth between vowels and consonants in Tolkien's languages. I was just analyzing an example where [u] became [w]: N
"of the Spouses" from primitive
I couldn't find any examples of the combination [au+w] for Sindarin or Noldorin in my notes. I don't think this combination is even possible in Primitive Quenderin, so it could only have arisen in later compounds like in your example.
Mar 08, 2015 (19:27)
The OW would become O, making it Moedh.
Let's run this through the phonological history of Sindarin (using Salo's A Gateway to Sindarin), just to see if this would happen.
(Long /a/ becomes Long /ɔ/) mɔɔweda
(Long /ɔ/ becomes /au/. /au/ is retained before /w/) mauweð
(/u/ and /w/ merge when adjacent) maweð
So, I think that Hjalmar's reconstruction is right.
Mar 08, 2015 (21:17)
Do we want to make a Q cognate while we're at it?
Mar 08, 2015 (22:17)
I stand corrected. I double-checked GS and Salo did say that [au+w] reduced to [au] (GS:62, §4.177). Following that rule,
([maueð] or [maweð]) would be correct. I am not 100% convinced that would happen in a later compound, but since we are positing it is an early compound, it seems the evidence is against
As for a Quenya cognate ... if the primitive form were
, I think we would end up with Q
Mar 08, 2015 (23:11)
I just feel that (at least in Quenya) the meaning of the derivates of BED/BES/BER moved away from the literal sense of "bond".
Mar 09, 2015 (00:07)
We do have EQ
"glove", from the same root MAHA that was the later basis for "hand". If we modernized this word to later Quenya, a vowel would be needed before the
Mar 09, 2015 (00:19)
that's a much better alternative in my opinion
Mar 09, 2015 (14:35)
BTW the roots WAY and VAÝA (
) could provide an alternative for the second part of the compound.