Jump to content

Talk:Frankish language

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 88.159.64.210 (talk) at 20:34, 11 September 2011 (→‎Jardin/Garden). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Untitled

from VfD:

Seems like rubbish, or at least not notable. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:12, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

  • Keep, quite notable. Needs lot of work though. --fvw* 04:47, 2004 Nov 26 (UTC)
  • Keep and list on RfE. I can't believe the linguistic folks and medievalists have allowed this to be in this state. (I can't help, unfortunately.) Geogre 06:03, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strong keep, article already has a cleanup tag. [[User:Radman1|RaD Man (talk)]] 06:05, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Needs cleanup and expansion, not deletion. jni 09:20, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: There already is a redirect from frankish to an article at franks. Maybe move this to frankish (language)? Or even to frankish? Anyway, I've put in some wikilinks. No vote as yet. Andrewa 09:25, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Comment: I went looking through to try to find this. I thought this was a bad duplicate, since obviously we'd have an article at Frankish. Well, Frankish redir to Franks, where there is a line saying there is the language Frankish language which goes to a disambig. to.... Old Frankish language. Four steps to get at what should naturally be at Frankish.Geogre 14:01, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Comment: You're right, but the inconsistency is in academics. Where "Spanish" could be the adjective, "Frankish" is kind of rarely used that way. At any rate, it's rare enough that we ought to at least be able to cut down one step in the redirect train. "Frankish" ought to be a disambiguation to the language or the people (as there is no country to which it could refer). Geogre 03:21, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Move to Frankish sounds good. Dr Zen 10:07, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • KEEP There seems to be a dislike of rare languages on Wikipedia. If there is space for the Klingon Language then there should be room here for real languages. -Ms. Greenberg 14:21, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, definitely. FWIW, Frankish language is a disambig. Most knowledge of Old Frankish comes from reconstructions; there aren't any extended texts AFAIK and few inscriptions. Smerdis of Tlön 15:39, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strong keep. Really interesting topic, too, and I wish I knew enough about it to fill out this article (hope someone else does). Antandrus 03:27, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep but do not move. While "Frankish" is rarely used as an adjective, it is sometimes used that way. (Fairly frequently in the current links that show up in "what links here" to the Frankish redirect page.) The way to shorten the redirect train is to go back and pipe the links to the correct destination. (forgot to sign my vote earlier. sorry) Rossami (talk)

end moved discussion


Lingua franca

The article and phrase "Lingua franca" links to this page however no etymology is given. It would seem one of the key raison d'etres, to borrow another romance language phrase.

At least a seperate article with a short description of the etymology when linking "lingua franca" would be informative.

Information

OK, I created the original page, since there seemed to be many links referring to the subject. It is quite hard to find good information to include, though, since there are so few reliable sources. Ideallay, this page should include some information of how Frankish differed from other West Germanic languages of the same time, and how Frankish and other Germanic languages affected Old French. (I believe Old French also was affected by Old Norse, but since that was a distinct North Germanic language, I think these words should be relatively easy to distinguish.) I believe most of the sources the Franks left were written in Latin, though, so it isn't of much help for finding info about their language.

Hmmm, this page contains a few reconstructed likely frankish words, borrowed into old french and later english... http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=frankish&searchmode=none

Article scope

Do I understand correctly that this article deals with an entirely unattested language, guessed at from loanwords? Otherwise, it would have to be merged with Old Low Franconian. dab (ᛏ) 13:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I originally created the page, since there were links regarding it, but no article. Isn't there many other language articles on the Wikipedia with little or no attestation, anyway? 惑乱 分からん 18:02, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was not objecting to articles about unattested languages, I was asking if this language is identical to Old Low Franconian. It does seem, however, that this is about the unattested predecessor of Old Low Franconian, so the article is perfectly fine on its own. dab (ᛏ) 15:05, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's the point and focus of it. Thank you for clarifying. 惑乱 分からん 18:47, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Danser

I think words like "danson"/"danser" in the modern Germanic languages are borrowings from French, and not true cognates with Frankish (which, afaik, even had an other meaning for the word). 惑乱 分からん 18:02, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Word Dancing is a Germanic word, that was borrowed by many romance languages not the other way around. Sandertje 18:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
You didn't understand me completely, what I meant was that the French word is borrowed from G Frankish, but the modern words in the G languages are borrowings from French. 惑乱 分からん 19:09, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not in Dutch. Sandertje 19:10, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
I thought that it at least changed its meaning, based on French, but if you say so, alright. 惑乱 分からん 19:13, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
many Frankish words were borrowed back into Germanic languages via Old French. "standard" is one example. "dance" is quite possibly another. "not in Dutch" is rather optimistic for a word the ultimate origin of which is not known. It may be Frankish. The Dutch word may derive Frankish directly, but it is much more likely that it is based on the French word. This is not a good example anyway, because of the uncertainty involved. dab (ᛏ) 15:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that Dutch, a language deriving from Frankish, had "lost" the word for "dancing" since the extinction of Frankish and then somehow got it back from Old French?Highly unlikely. Sander 16:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was what I thought, as well. Anyway, I don't know much about it, so I'm not fit to discuss it further. 惑乱 分からん 18:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is any evidence for dance having a Frankish or Germanic origin. My copy of the Oxford English Dictionary has the following for the etymology of 'dance':

[Old French dancer, (also mod.) danser from Proto-Romance, of unknown origin.]

As far as I can see, there is no recorded native variant of "dance" in Old English; there are words for dancing, but none of them look like dansen. The German tanzen is essentially identical to the Frankish version after considering the High German consonant shift, which only suggests this word was in German before the shift occurred in the Dark Ages. The fact that this word is so consistent across the West Germanic languages is consistent with the OED's explanation of it being a Late Latin import.

I have therefore removed it from the as an example of a Frankish introduction. --Saforrest 11:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


According to Etymonline:

Dance c.1300, from O.Fr. dancier, perhaps from Frankish. A word of uncertain origin but which, through French influence in arts and society, has become the primary word for this activity from Spain to Russia. Replaced O.E. sealtian.

In the Dutch language, the only remaining Frankish language, it's "dansen" which could be seen as an indication that it truly was a Old Frankish word. I do not think it's a latin borowing into Germanic languages you see ...

However, as Etymonline says, it is not certain ... so its best not to include the word. Rex Germanus Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona 14:05, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad we agree about the word being here. I'm not sure I understand your point about the Dutch word dansen: sure, it looks a lot more like the Frankish danson than German tanzen or English dance does, but that doesn't prove anything: it merely shows that Dutch is a descendant of Frankish, which we already knew.
Anyway, my main reason for doubting that this is a Germanic word is the lack of native cognates in any other Germanic languages. Words don't usually come from nowhere: if dansen is a uniquely Frankish word, it probably was borrowed from somewhere, and aside from Celtic or Romance, there's just not a lot of other languages in that area to borrow from.
By the way, I don't think it's correct to say Dutch is "the only remaining Frankish language". However, I'll leave that to Talk:Frankish language. --Saforrest 16:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It being of Latin/Romance origin is quite unlikely, however not having a cognate does not mean it isn't Germanic. Rex Germanus Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona 13:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't Old High German have 'Danson'? And Modern German also has 'Tanz'. As for no native cognates in other Germanic languages, I can't say for any others, but the English word 'Sealtian' was itself a Latin borrowing. It came from the same root as 'Saltation' and the Spanish word 'Saltar'. Maybe 'Sealtian' replaced the Old English cognate. Besides, I think 'Dance' is present in all the Romance languages because they all borrowed the word from French, which was at the time the language of high culture. 213.249.245.35 11:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I remember reading about a derivation of Old French dancer from a Vulgar Latin *ad-antiare, which doesn't strike me as entirely implausible. In any way, the origin of the Old French word seems to be obscure, but the Germanic words are always considered borrowings from French, ultimately, as far as I can recall, in the etymological dictionaries. Which makes sense to me: I fail to see any basis for the reconstruction of a Germanic verb *dantō- or so. German tanzen and the other Germanic words like Dutch dansen or English dance simply cannot be explained as old cognates, nor Old French dancer as a borrowing from German, because the sound laws don't fit. Rather, they suggest that the French word is the origin of the Germanic terms, indeed, not the other way round. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:51, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This academic database [1] suggests that the word is "unlikely" to have stemmed from Frankish "danson". "More likely", it descended from Frankish "dintjan" (which is etymologically related to to the contemporary Dutch word "deinzen"). Morgengave (talk) 16:03, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

graper ?

In modern French, there is no such verb (graper). I never heard it (I'm French) and it's not in my dictionary, a famous French dictionary (Robert). HTH.

I found the words "gripper" and "grappin" in my Swedish-French dictionary from the 50's, though I have no idea if the words are common in modern French, or if they're directly derived from Frankish. 惑乱 分からん 15:09, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
According to Le Dictionnaire de l'Académie française, "gripper" is probably derived from Frankish, so I change the page accordingly. 惑乱 分からん 23:59, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's some confusion here. I don't know what the old Frankish words mean, but "gripper" in modern French means to physically grasp at someone or something; the sense of "comprehending" is given by the word "comprendre" which has a Latin, not a Frankish, origin. (24.201.253.66 00:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

"standard"

f. the OED:

aphetic a. OF. estandard, -art, -estendard, -art (mod.F. étendard) = med.L. standardum, -us, standarium, etc. Pr. estandard, -art, Sp., Pg. estandarte, It. stendardo; according to most scholars f. com. Rom. estend-ere (L. extend-re to stretch out: see EXTEND v.) + -ARD; a parallel synonymous formation with different suffix is It. stendale, late OF. estandale, -deille (med.L. standale, -lis). The Fr. word has passed into all the living Teut. langs.: MHG. stanthart (by popular etymology, as if ‘stand hard’), later standart, standert (mod.G. standarte), MDu. standaert (mod.Du. standaard, standerd), Da. standart, Sw. standar.
The origin of sense 9 (‘standard of measure or weight’), whence the other senses in branch II are derived, is somewhat obscure. It appears in AF. (estaundart) and Anglo-L. (standardus) in the 13th c., two centuries earlier than our earliest vernacular instance. It has not been found in continental OF.; the use of Du. standaard in this sense is believed to be imitated from English. It is noteworthy that in early instances the standard of measure is always either expressly or by implication called ‘the king's standard’, an expression which belongs to the older sense 1. It seems probable that sense 9 is a fig. use of sense 1; the king's standard being the point of reunion of the army, and the centre from which commands are issued.
The senses grouped as branch III are of doubtful, probably of various and in some instances of mixed origin. The notion of ‘something conspicuously erected’, involved in sense 1, would account for several of them; others may be referred to the idea of ‘something permanent, fixed, or stationary’, generalized from sense 9. Etymological association with STAND v. has, however, certainly affected the whole group, and it is possible that in some uses the word should be regarded as an alteration of STANDER. The senses of this branch are almost confined to English: OF. has estandart some kind of torch (rare1), and WFlem. has standaart mill-post (De Bo; standaert, Kilian); but the relation of these to the English uses is obscure.]

--VKokielov 18:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The form from which most Romance languages adopted was that of Medieval Latin, which clearly shows the stem vowel as "a" (standardum). Earliest French forms also show "a" (1100 estandart; cf 1678 estendart. Italian, true to form, borrows the later French form as wont). Though standards can certainly be "stretched out", as many other things as well, the concept of extending or stretching is by no means the defining or distinguishing feature conveyed by a standard. As a result, there is certainly no concensus on derivation from a form of extendere. Also, the suffix -ard poses a problem at this point in time: in Old French, this was still a fremd suffix, being borrowed as part of the whole-unit word, and was not part of Old French derivational morphology (it is, however, part of Middle and Modern French derivational morphology, being appended to words of any origin). This further points to the word as a germanic loan. Lastly, according to French authorities, Académie Française in particular, the word derives from Low Frankish standhard. Leasnam (talk) 00:31, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

not attested

I think this not entirely true. There are a few snippets in the Lex Salica and in 1996 a sword sheath was found from 425-450 or so with 4 words on it (in runes!) near Bergakker. Interestingly there already seem to be some characteristics deemed typical for the later Old Dutch on it. Jcwf (talk) 14:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

some comments

just a few words about the table. it is important to realize that words given under GERMANIC COGNATES are intended as a basis of comparison, so additions like "Du reiger" under HERON and Du trog/G Trog "trough" under TROENE are over-reaching and needless. the point is not to give a full etymological recounting. reiger and trog are NOT directly related to the headword. please avoid making excessive additions.

and second, in this discussion i have seen references to the oxford english dictionary. know simply that the OED is intended for mass appeal and a wide distribution and does not represent the work of etymological specialists. like many other things, the older the edition is, the more mistakes it has, and as such, is in particular need of updating and better research. Check out instead Webster's Third International Dictionary (a gigantic book), Chambers Etymological Dictionary, or the Etymological Dictionary of Germanic Languages. further, the Online Etymology site also has a number of errors (mainly un-updated entries) that are the result of ignoring specialist litterature on the subject.

Flibjib8 (talk)

Flibjib8 has a curious opinion of English dictionaries: the Oxford English dictionary is a multivolume work begun in the mid-19th century by a large team of researchers, and is being constantly revised and updated by present-day experts on etymology, semantics etc. It has aways attamepted to include all words used in English sice circ 1100 AD and gives thier full meanings, etymology and usage. To say that it is a `work for mass appeal' and to place it lower in authority and intellectual level than Webster's or Chambers', which are works of much narrower scope, is mistaken. Possibly Flibjib8 has compared a school edition or the concise OED with the other dictionaries. I have no connection with the OED except as a satisfied user. Barney Bruchstein (talk) 22:41, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

I've tagged this article for cleanup because the majority of the text of it falls into two sections ("The sword sheath of Bergakker," and "The impact of Old Frankish on modern French"), the latter of which is simply a giant list which could just as well be its own article and not dominate the entirety of this one. The list part in particular should, IMO, be condensed or split off into its own article entirely. RobertM525 (talk) 11:09, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Code

I am not sure whether the frk code by ISO is actually meant to indicate Old Frankish. Reasons are:

  • Ethnologue includes it. (Ethnologue only includes extinct languages if their date of extinction is after 1950)
  • It says "Bible portions: 1758–1827", which can't be true if only four words are attested to begin with.
  • It indicates Latin as the script used. (weak argument, but still).

I think it is trying to refer to some modern Franconian dialect which became extinct, rather than Old Franconian. -- Prince Kassad (talk) 17:32, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Legend/caption

Would someone please add a mention of the purpose of the asterisks preceding some words, for the rest of us ? It seems that those are always prefixing a Frankish word in this article, and it also seems like some kind of convention in etymology, but can it be spelled out, please ? I mean, what the hell?, i keep running into those all over Wikt, but i have yet to see them explained ; i'm beginning to wonder if there's been a bunch of COPYVIO copy+paste from elsewhere, or what. TIA, --Jerome Potts (talk) 05:23, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In historical linguistics the asterisk is used to indicate a reconstructed form, i.e. a word-form that has not been documented but is theorized to have existed at a certain time. See Asterisk, Linguistic reconstruction. Iblardi (talk) 16:05, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. --Jerome Potts (talk) 06:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jardin/Garden

Garden is afaik not from a (direct) Germanic root. According to some other wiki topics on Germanic languages, English Garden comes from French Jardin. But in turn French Jardin does have a Germanic root, We(h)r(da). (protect/fortify. The walling of of the garden from wilderness). This article is not incorrect, but seems to suggest that Jardin derives from Garden instead of the other way around. 

 88.159.64.210 (talk) 20:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Frankish_language&oldid=449882289"