Re: Breton, Cornish & French

"John Briggs" <john.briggs4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:8knvj.2363$g81.884@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Chess One wrote:
>> "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:DJlvj.2349$g81.902@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Chess One wrote:
>>>> "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>> news:m9usj.7673$OU5.4882@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> Chess One wrote:
>>>>>> "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:IaGrj.6313$OU5.705@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>> Chess One wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It is interesting to also note the name of Stratford; is the
>>>>>>>>>> 'Strat' A. Sax or Latinate?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> in A. Sax it means muddy ~ muddy crossing
>>>>>>>>>> and in Latin [f. Strata] a paved or metalled road
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Straet" is Old English for 'Roman road'.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes. But it has another meaning! It is a verb, 'to throw mud'.
>>>>>>>> And may indeed have other meanings - and the point of
>>>>>>>> mentioning them is examine which is which.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You have neglected your own prescriptions and not given any
>>>>>>> citations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You have neglected the fact that I usually do, and for this
>>>>>> generality, no citation is possible, except you research the A.
>>>>>> Sax for Strat. Was that your intent? There seem to be 5
>>>>>> definitions of STRAT which are old words;
>>>>>
>>>>> Prove it.
>>>>
>>>> Prove what? You are rather faint, I find. There is no proof of
>>>> anything ever except people agree on what consitutes a proof. Did
>>>> you mean, I should cite the meanings given for 'Strat'?
>>>>
>>>> You see, whatever I say has no consequence to you, and these
>>>> requests for proof are jejeune stalls on usenet about what you
>>>> don't know - or unwilling to admit. Let us see what happens to your
>>>> understand if it becomes an informed one:-
>>>>
>>>> (1) to stop; to hinder
>>>> (2) to splash with mud [Devon]
>>>> (3) to bring forth young prematurely, applied to beasts [Cornwall]
>>>> (4) to dash in pieces [West]
>>>> (5) a blow {Somerset]
>>>>
>>>> Now - do some work, and validate these references, to their
>>>> veracity, but also to the context in which I wrote - otherwise you
>>>> may appear to have more opinion than knowledge, which is a perilous
>>>> stance, neh?
>>>
>>> I can't validate these "references", because you have failed to cite
>>> your source.
>>
>> James Orchard Halliwell - Surely you heard of him? How can you talk of
>> medieval words and not know Halliwell? I don't mean 'heard of'.
>
> Later J.O. Halliwell-Phillipps, of course.

Are you still at source? What was the point of your inquiry is to the
point. 
Now you have it, nothing other than a goolged gloss  ;(

>> But if not try a google, and the library will /not/ likely have his
>> dictionary on Archaic Words - but persevere, since it is much more
>> illustrative of Middle-English and earlier, than than the fatuous
>> OED, which your library will have, but which will omit many
>> references and citations wherever available, often chosing a recent
>> one, rather than the earliest one.
>
> Well, Halliwell's dictionary was first published in 1850.  You would be 
> better off consulting Wright's "English Dialect Dictionary".

Is that the one abandoned at 'c' or 'd'?

>>> It is pointless to speculate, but you seem to be citing a dialect
>>> dictionary of Modern English.
>>
>> Let you be pointlessly speculating at your own expense at whatever
>> 'seems' to you, the person asks who does not know! These words were
>> already rare in 1800, and I think that cannot be your 'modern
>> English', whatever that phrase may mean.
>
> "Modern English" is the language since 1500.

So, return to your own issue, merrily burried here - what was it again?

PI

> -- 
> John Briggs
>
>