Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 10:39:18 -0800 From: Dan Moonhawk Alford Subject: Re: /w/ and /hw/ Speaking of which, where does 'hore-hound (drops)' fit into this, if at all? On Sun, 3 Dec 1995, Dennis R. Preston wrote: > Rudy, > Of course you are right. Perhaps some of us slipped into saying 'derived > from' when we meant 'cognate with.' > Now we know the source of the 'wh'; a very late analogy, but I'm still not > sure about the vowel. I take your citation to be of 'hore' with a long > vowel(?) If so, it should be ModEng [u] as I have heard it in Northern > American use. Why is the majority usage [o]? > Dennis > > > If English derives from Latin , it must be as a loan- > >word, much too late for Grimm's Law. So then it should be <*core>, which it > >ain't. So much for armchair etymologizing. In such questions, my sainted > >OE professor, Rudolph Willard, used to repair to the OED, which informs us > >that OE had (possibly derived from ON), and that the spelling is > >a 16-th century refinement (I would guess on the model of ). But any > >connection with a Latin /k/ would have to be at a pre-Latin level, not a > >direct borrowing. > > --Rudy Troike (back in the fray again!) >