Re: Breton, Cornish & French

"John Briggs" <john.briggs4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:tbIvj.4656$582.869@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> 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'?
>
> No - but you'll have to explain what you are talking about.

You referenced another source, the one abandoned at letter c or d? Do you 
not know your own source? What did it have to say, and I think 'no' is an 
innapreciable comment.

>>>>> 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?
>
> You were trying to claim that "Stratford" meant 'muddy crossing',

which it does in Anglo Saxon.

> and I pointed out that it actually means 'ford by which a Roman road 
> crosses a River' - "straet" being Old English for 'Roman road'.

It means 'metalled road'

> Had your wits been less disordered, you would have tried to find an 
> example that was not on a Roman road...

And the result of this conversation is that there are two possibilities;
to 
take from the Roman, or to take the Saxon from the Anglo Saxon town. And I

do not insist I am right, but venture an alternate.

Is this in itself such a crime as to be accused of one's wits being
astray, 
when considering another prospect for the placename?

I cannot prove that it means muddy crossing any more than you can prove it

is a Latinate form.

What is odd about you, Mr, Briggs, is that you infer you can.

Phil Innes

> John Briggs
>
>