NOWELE. North-Western European Language Evolution - Volume 69, Issue 1, 2016

This paper deals with graphophonematic and onomastic problems arising from two early English runic inscriptions. Since Pre-OE /ā̆/ and /ɔ̄̆/ were apparently graphemicized as ᚪ a2 and ᚩ a3 at (about) the same time during the late fifth century, it is possible to identify rune no. 6  on the Loveden Hill urn as a variant of the āc-rune ᚪ,  (~ ). Thus, the initial runic sequence there, sïþa1ba2d, renders a correctly shaped male name Pre-OE Sīþæbad (= WFranc./Hispano-Goth. Sendebadus). The Watchfield case fitting is at least 50 years younger, and the first part of its inscription, ha1riboki, may have undergone sub-phonemic umlaut (/hæribōki/ phonetically [ˈhærɪˌboːcɪ] or [ˈhεrɪˌbøːcɪ]?). The second sequence, wusa1, represents a female nickname Pre-OE Wusæ ‘that one who bustles about’, a name which has an exact male counterpart in Langob. Vuso.

On the basis of fragmentary evidence from the ancient Celtic languages (e.g., Gaulish), but especially from the rich poetic heritage of the medieval Insular Celtic languages (e.g., Old Irish, Middle Welsh), the poetic terminology reconstructable for Common Celtic is presented. The possible metrical remains from ancient Celtic are reviewed and an attempt is made to identify their principles of versification. The characteristics of the medieval Irish and medieval British systems of versification are described. Finally, the question of the genetic relationship of ancient and medieval Celtic versification is discussed, and the possible relationship of Celtic with neighbouring Germanic, especially medieval Scandinavian, traditions is briefly reviewed.

Henry Fox Talbot, the father of photography, was a polymath, and among his many publications we find works on mathematics, physics, astronomy, chemistry, archeology, ancient history, mythology, and Assyrian cuneiform inscriptions. He was also at home in botany. In 1847 he brought out a thick book titled English Etymologies. His archive at Cambridge allows one to trace the preparatory stages for this work. Talbot’s book is instructive as an example of how some talented, brilliantly educated, and industrious Englishmen in the forties of the nineteenth century went about discovering the origin of Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English words. Talbot was aware of sound correspondences but did not feel bound by them. A list of his sources gives a good idea of the state of the art in England. Talbot’s etymologies are interesting only from this point of view. They should be studied as we study the efforts of much earlier researchers, that is, as part of the history of science.