The Morphology of the Old English Plant-Names
In: From Earth to ArtSearch for other papers by Hans Sauer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Purchase instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Purchase instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Under the heading of morphology, I deal mainly with word-formation patterns, loan influence, and morphological variants, peculiarities and problems. The principal pattern used for creating Old English plant-names is compounding (especially noun/noun, e.g. feld-wyrt, but there are also a few other types, such as noun in the genitive/noun, e.g. crāwan-lēac); to a lesser degree, suffixation (Þistel, galluc) and zero-derivation, i.e. derivation without a suffix (ribbe, cwice), play a role. Prefixation, on the other hand, is very rare. Relatively many Old English plant-names are loan-formations based on Latin models (e.g. candel-wyrt < herba lucernaria; fīf-lēafe < quinquefolium) or hybrid formations (e.g. cisir-bēam < cerasus; lēon-fōt < pes leonis). Among the morphological peculiarities I list are, for example, complex words with more than two elements (ceóelferóingwyrt, unfortrœdde), formations with blocked or unclear elements (Þēfe-Þorn, feld-uuop), obscured compounds (Þū-Þistil < Þūfe-Þistil?), and cases of popular etymology (levisticum, lubisticum > lufe-stice ‘love-stitch’). I hope to produce a complete survey of patterns and forms in the foreseeable future.