reparata des 4 III 20a timbret III 20b gret III 20b forspilet III 21 b ateret III 21 b Jeestæpelet Appendix 13b5 Equa pietate 48 [Uxoris linguam...] ferre memento spar hire 6 emne III 23a III 24a 2 unniding steht rechts am Rande von III 9; es kann wohl nur zu non parcus oder zu munificus i. largus gehören. Um den Genitiv anzuzeigen. 4 Um den Plural wordes anzudeuten. 5 Die Zusatz-Disticha 12 und 13 des Appendix bei Némethy S. 40, welche Schenkl (Wiener Studien V 166) im MS. O. II. 31 des Trinity College zu Cambridge auf dem Rande fand, stehen in unserer Oxforder Handschrift im Text fortlaufend hinter Dist. III 22. 6 Am Rande stehend. 7 Lies underfoð. deriat IV praef. 2 fod 7 IV 1b wedliat IV 1b fremfulle pinc IV 2a. Eine etymologisierende Glosse zu lat. gratis 'umsonst', da sowohl ae. pancfullice (Elfric, Liv. of Saints XXX 144) wie me. ne. thankfully nur 'dankbar' heifsen. 2 Darüber i. inuestiga uel inquire. 3 Lies strenches; vgl. das gleiche Vergessen des Abkürzungsbalkens in coplectere 89. Der Glossator hat fac sapias fälschlich als 'bekanntmachen' gefasst. 5 Lies weorcum. Das Ji in bezitenum ist verwischt, aber sicher zu lesen. 9 Lies Jitsere[s]. 7 c und e sehr undeutlich. Lies pe und underfangen. Die ae. Glosse steht am Rande von IV 21a. (ed. Baehrens, Poetae latini minores, Leipzig 1891, III 14 ff.). 1 Lies complectere. 2 Hinter D ein Buchstabe (e oder i) ausradiert. 3 Steht am Rande rechts. 4 Darüber i. lugere. 5 r korrigiert aus 1. Das a sehr undeutlich. Hinter noch ein Buchstabe, der einem e am ähnlichsten sieht. Hinter spill: steht unmittelbar eine lat. Glosse, was wohl der Grund, dafs die englische Glosse nicht ausgeschrieben ist. Ob über pan noch ein Abkürzungszeichen steht, lässt sich nicht entscheiden. "Unmittelbar hinter 7 steht i. bona, weshalb vielleicht der Glossator das Schlufs-e (intinze) wegliefs. 3 Lies 1 So liest unser lat. Text statt inmanis. 2 So statt Arctus. 4 Mit insularem r-Zeichen. sup. Würzburg und Oxford. Max Förster und Arthur Napier. Nachtrag. Zu inojet S. 21 weist Napier darauf hin, dass z. B. auch im Leben des h. Chad (Angl. X 134) neben sonst erhaltenem ge- ein einmaliges i- in imaced (für gemacod) vorkommt. On some cases of Scandinavian influence in English. I. The name Orrmin. White's attempt to explain the form Ormin by the side of Orm comes first in chronological order. According to him (Preface to Holt-White's ed. p. LIX), the baptismal name of the author in question was Ormin, and Orm is supposed to be an abridged form, to be compared to Seba for Sæborht and Totta for Torhthelm. I am not aware that this opinion has ever been refuted. It was at any rate simply ignored by those scholars whose subsequent interpretations have come to my knowledge, with the possible exception of Prof. Zupitza (see infra), though I am unable to verify this. Mätzner seems to have been the first to think of the obvious equation of the shorter form with the O. Norse ormr, and, tacitly excluding White's abridgedform theory, asks with a view to explaining the apparent -in suffix, if the word could owe its form to the influence of the Latin suffix -inus. A note in Prof. Emerson's excellently conceived but carelessly worked-out Middle English Reader (Macmillan & Co., 1905; p. 255) refers me to an explanation by the late Prof. Zupitza who makes it a diminutive of Orm on the French model; cf. Awwstin', a form also in the Ormulum. This view is apparently endorsed by Prof. Napier (Academy, 1894, I p. 62) and Kluge (Engl. Studien 22, p. 181). Kluge calls attention to Wallterr, Orms brother also having a name which at least shows some French influence in its form. There does not seem to me to be any reason for considering any of these three explanations a priori utterly impossible. I should like, however, to call the one by White very improbable, considering that it does not meet the difficulty of explaining the form Ormin, the original one on his supposition. Moreover the connection with O. N. ormr is on the face of it so very plausible as almost to amount to a certainty. With regard to the Latin or the French suffix, explaining the form Ormin, I cannot help thinking that at any rate the assumption of a diminutive here is entirely groundless. And it See on this cases of pseudo-ellipsis, the very interesting monograph of Karl Sunden: 'Contributions to the study of Elliptical words in Modern English', Upsala (diss.) 1904. 2 The context would perhaps show that 'diminutiv' is here to be taken in the sense of a pet form see below in which case there would be no objection. Is the suggestion Zupitza's or Emerson's? The latter's quotation does not make this point clear. |