The CBB

qwed117 wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020 08:52 Does *blądha originate in *bladą,

Sadly not.

and if not that then, blauþijaną?

Alas, no.


I'll add another potentially useful note on spelling: the final -a is just schwa.

[the rest of the pronunciation is as you'd expect it to be. Except I suppose that the -o- is actually a rounded central vowel; I'm not sure whether it should be -o- or -u-, but that's not important, and is just an allophony thing - it doesn't affect the etymology. Oh, and you've probably guessed, but the stress is on the first syllable, with secondary stress on the third]

hmm, what does *dh represent? I've been running on the assumption that it's an edh/voiced dental fricative. Also does *dh originate from one segment in PG?

Is the whole word a verb?

qwed117 wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020 21:10 hmm, what does *dh represent? I've been running on the assumption that it's an edh/voiced dental fricative. Also does *dh originate from one segment in PG?

Oh, sorry: yes, it's /D/, and it was a single phoneme in PGmc

Creyeditor wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020 21:26 Is the whole word a verb?

It is not, no.

[I'll just give a warning at this point: I can't off-hand think of a one-word English translation for this word, so I'll have to be a bit generous in marking translations. However, I don't think the concept should be difficult to understand.]

Salmoneus wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020 21:42

Creyeditor wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020 21:26 Is the whole word a verb?

It is not, no.

A noun?

Hmm, are there any elided syllables in *bladha “between” the b and the l?

Good thinking, but no!

Salmoneus wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020 13:12

Creyeditor wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020 07:19

Salmoneus wrote: ↑02 Dec 2020 22:57

Creyeditor wrote: ↑02 Dec 2020 18:18 Can rą́ngong be further subdivided?

Yes, it can be

Is the correct way rą́n-gong?

I'm afraid not.

Is it rą́ng-ong?

yes

Is ong a lexical root?

no

The Proto-Germanic segment that became *bladha, did it begin with the sequence *bl?

Is ong a nominalizer/gerund/participle suffix?

qwed117 wrote: ↑13 Dec 2020 05:59 The Proto-Germanic segment that became *bladha, did it begin with the sequence *bl?

No!

EDIT: well, technically no, at least. Diachronically, the segment does not descend from a word begining with *bl. However, in folk etymology it is widely confused with some words descending from such a sequence, and this has somewhat tinted the connotations. However, you needn't worry about that for the purposes of the game...

Creyeditor wrote: ↑13 Dec 2020 11:42 Is ong a nominalizer/gerund/participle suffix?

Yes. For the purposes of this word, you can see it as a gerund or verbal noun deriver.

Did the PG root that became rą́ng start with an *r?

Nope!

Was the Proto-Germanic root something with a W in its onset, like *þwinganą or *wrangaz?

Khemehekis wrote: ↑14 Dec 2020 00:39 Was the Proto-Germanic root something with a W in its onset, like *þwinganą or *wrangaz?

Which root - of the first element or the second?

But this is a rhetorical question, since the answer would be 'no' in either case.