German Noun Roots of Germanic Origin with Multiple Non-Schwa SyllablesTranscribing German written text to computer readable phonetic alphabetDid the Dutch “zee” (sea) and “meer” (lake) diverge or did the German “das Meer” (sea) and “der See” (lake) diverge from a shared linguistic heritage?Etymology of the unit “Marc” (German►English)Bisyllabic German Verb Roots with the Stress Being on the First Syllable
Best practice for printing and evaluating formulas with the minimal coding
Is there a way to generate a mapping graph like this?
Why use nominative in Coniugatio periphrastica passiva?
How to play vs. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 d6?
Do most Taxis give Receipts in London?
How do we explain the use of a software on a math paper?
How to tease a romance without a cat and mouse chase?
Is it wise to pay off mortgage with 401k?
List of lists elementwise greater/smaller than
How would a physicist explain this starship engine?
Why is this python script running in background consuming 100 % CPU?
Do 'destroy' effects count as damage?
Is my company merging branches wrong?
How should I mix small caps with digits or symbols?
Was murdering a slave illegal in American slavery, and if so, what punishments were given for it?
How to become an Editorial board member?
Is being an extrovert a necessary condition to be a manager?
Does George B Sperry logo on fold case for photos indicate photographer or case manufacturer?
Presenting 2 results for one variable using a left brace
How to draw with Tikz a chord parallel to AC that passes through a point?
Ribbon Cable Cross Talk - Is there a fix after the fact?
Story about encounter with hostile aliens
What to call a small, open stone or cement reservoir that supplies fresh water from a spring or other natural source?
How to use Screen Sharing if I don't know the remote Mac's IP address
German Noun Roots of Germanic Origin with Multiple Non-Schwa Syllables
Transcribing German written text to computer readable phonetic alphabetDid the Dutch “zee” (sea) and “meer” (lake) diverge or did the German “das Meer” (sea) and “der See” (lake) diverge from a shared linguistic heritage?Etymology of the unit “Marc” (German►English)Bisyllabic German Verb Roots with the Stress Being on the First Syllable
With non-schwa syllables I mean bisyllabic words ending in -e, -en, -er, -el don't count. But trisyllabic words with similar endings do.
Some examples I've found: Arbeit, Armut, Heimat, Heirat Wollust, Habicht, Kranich
Though, I'm not sure whether Wollust counts as noun stem or a compound noun and Wiktionary tells me Armut and Heimat etymologically share the same suffix (with Kleinod and Einöde, which are also possible candidates for a list of such words). Looking at the etymologies of Arbeit and Heirat, it's not clear if they are also "explainable" the way the other ones are.
Is there a list of words like that somewhere? Are there any with three syllables? Ones where stress doesn't fall on the first syllable? Can you say all words of this kind can be explained by their etymology and no "true" German noun stem of Germanic origin is polysyllabic?
(I also found Atem, Jugend, Tugend, which, although containing a schwa in their second syllable, do interestingly sorta deviate from regular bisyllabic German noun roots.)
german
add a comment |
With non-schwa syllables I mean bisyllabic words ending in -e, -en, -er, -el don't count. But trisyllabic words with similar endings do.
Some examples I've found: Arbeit, Armut, Heimat, Heirat Wollust, Habicht, Kranich
Though, I'm not sure whether Wollust counts as noun stem or a compound noun and Wiktionary tells me Armut and Heimat etymologically share the same suffix (with Kleinod and Einöde, which are also possible candidates for a list of such words). Looking at the etymologies of Arbeit and Heirat, it's not clear if they are also "explainable" the way the other ones are.
Is there a list of words like that somewhere? Are there any with three syllables? Ones where stress doesn't fall on the first syllable? Can you say all words of this kind can be explained by their etymology and no "true" German noun stem of Germanic origin is polysyllabic?
(I also found Atem, Jugend, Tugend, which, although containing a schwa in their second syllable, do interestingly sorta deviate from regular bisyllabic German noun roots.)
german
add a comment |
With non-schwa syllables I mean bisyllabic words ending in -e, -en, -er, -el don't count. But trisyllabic words with similar endings do.
Some examples I've found: Arbeit, Armut, Heimat, Heirat Wollust, Habicht, Kranich
Though, I'm not sure whether Wollust counts as noun stem or a compound noun and Wiktionary tells me Armut and Heimat etymologically share the same suffix (with Kleinod and Einöde, which are also possible candidates for a list of such words). Looking at the etymologies of Arbeit and Heirat, it's not clear if they are also "explainable" the way the other ones are.
Is there a list of words like that somewhere? Are there any with three syllables? Ones where stress doesn't fall on the first syllable? Can you say all words of this kind can be explained by their etymology and no "true" German noun stem of Germanic origin is polysyllabic?
(I also found Atem, Jugend, Tugend, which, although containing a schwa in their second syllable, do interestingly sorta deviate from regular bisyllabic German noun roots.)
german
With non-schwa syllables I mean bisyllabic words ending in -e, -en, -er, -el don't count. But trisyllabic words with similar endings do.
Some examples I've found: Arbeit, Armut, Heimat, Heirat Wollust, Habicht, Kranich
Though, I'm not sure whether Wollust counts as noun stem or a compound noun and Wiktionary tells me Armut and Heimat etymologically share the same suffix (with Kleinod and Einöde, which are also possible candidates for a list of such words). Looking at the etymologies of Arbeit and Heirat, it's not clear if they are also "explainable" the way the other ones are.
Is there a list of words like that somewhere? Are there any with three syllables? Ones where stress doesn't fall on the first syllable? Can you say all words of this kind can be explained by their etymology and no "true" German noun stem of Germanic origin is polysyllabic?
(I also found Atem, Jugend, Tugend, which, although containing a schwa in their second syllable, do interestingly sorta deviate from regular bisyllabic German noun roots.)
german
german
edited 37 mins ago
sumelic
10.7k12358
10.7k12358
asked 9 hours ago
user3482545user3482545
736
736
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
I found an article "The structure of the German root", by Chris Golston and Richard Wiese (published online on ResearchGate in 1998; originally published in the book Phonology and Morphology of the Germanic Languages). The analysis in this article is based on a database adapted from a list made by Wolf Dieter Ortmann (1993), who created his database based on entries in root dictionaries, mainly Augst (1975).
The article has a footnote saying "At a later stage, we plan to make the database available through the internet" (p. 68-Researchgate). I haven't been able to find it, though.
On page 75 (Researchgate), the article says that there were 131 roots in the database with two syllables like Arbeit. This excludes words where the second syllable is schwa or a schwa + resonant/syllabic resonant, but the database includes some items considered "nativized loans" (Golston and Wiese give the examples "Abenteuer ‘adventure’, add- ‘add’, Akt ‘act’, Scharlach ‘scarlet fever’") (p. 68-ResearchGate). Also, the roots seem to be of all word classes: Golston and Wiese mention "[ʔalaın]
‘alone’" as a two-syllable root.
Golston and Wiese say that there were only five three-syllable roots in the database:
The five roots in our corpus that violate the alignment constraints twice are all loans and felt to be such by most speakers: [ʔaleːgʀo] ‘allegro,’ [baldʀiaːn] (name), [ʔɛnziaːn] (name), [feːbʀuaʀ] ‘February,’ and [januaʀ] ‘January.’
(page 75-Researchgate)
Based on this, I'm fairly certain that three-syllable noun stems would be extremely marginal if not nonexistent.
Without a look at the database, it's hard to tell how many of the two-syllable examples are "nativized loans": Golston and Wiese say that the database includes 792 roots of that type, so they could potentially account for almost all of the 131 two-syllable roots in the database.
Some of these do seem to be compounds: allein is transparently all- + ein-, cognate with English "alone" (all + one). It's also noteworthy that all five of their three-syllable roots are of Latin origin.
– Draconis
7 hours ago
add a comment |
There may be a few, but I can't think of any that you haven't already mentioned.
The reasons go back to Proto-Germanic. At some unknown point (after Grimm and Verner but before Common Germanic split, so probably within 100BCE - 100CE), the original Proto-Indo-European stress disappeared. Instead, Proto-Germanic stressed all words on the first syllable, and started to reduce unstressed vowels to nothingness.
At this point, no matter how long the original Proto-Germanic root had been, it began to collapse into a monosyllable: *ēmaitijǭ > OE ǣmette > ME amte > ModE "ant". This wasn't complete by the time Proto-Germanic split apart, and didn't go all the way in all the languages—but German, English, and Norse kept running with it, and took it as far as it could go.
Thus, in these three languages, almost all native Germanic roots are monosyllables, unless this would create an illegal consonant cluster. (This exception is why we see the native word "harvest" with two syllables, because the sequence *rvst isn't valid in English—compare German Herbst.) German also reduced most vowels in endings to schwa, where English went one step further and deleted them entirely: *xagatusjǭ with its feminine ending became OHG hagzisse > German Hexe, but OE hægtesse > ME hegge > English "hag".
So while there might be a few surviving polysyllabic Germanic roots in German, like Arbeit, I wouldn't expect many. There were plenty of such roots in Proto-Germanic, but sound changes have been working tirelessly to destroy them ever since.
P.S. I was taught that an Old Norse root was always a single syllable, without exception: anything longer was a compound, and consonants were deleted all over the place to keep the syllables pronounceable. But I don't know if this is actually true or not. Knowing how unpredictable language is, I'm cautious about any sort of "always".
Thanks! It's good to know that there were actual polysyllabic roots in Proto-Germanic. You also inadvertently suggested a word I had missed :D
– user3482545
51 mins ago
@user3482545 Oh? Which one?
– Draconis
49 mins ago
Perhaps User3482545 looked up *ēmaitijǭ and is talking about Ameise in the comment above.
– sumelic
39 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "312"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31490%2fgerman-noun-roots-of-germanic-origin-with-multiple-non-schwa-syllables%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I found an article "The structure of the German root", by Chris Golston and Richard Wiese (published online on ResearchGate in 1998; originally published in the book Phonology and Morphology of the Germanic Languages). The analysis in this article is based on a database adapted from a list made by Wolf Dieter Ortmann (1993), who created his database based on entries in root dictionaries, mainly Augst (1975).
The article has a footnote saying "At a later stage, we plan to make the database available through the internet" (p. 68-Researchgate). I haven't been able to find it, though.
On page 75 (Researchgate), the article says that there were 131 roots in the database with two syllables like Arbeit. This excludes words where the second syllable is schwa or a schwa + resonant/syllabic resonant, but the database includes some items considered "nativized loans" (Golston and Wiese give the examples "Abenteuer ‘adventure’, add- ‘add’, Akt ‘act’, Scharlach ‘scarlet fever’") (p. 68-ResearchGate). Also, the roots seem to be of all word classes: Golston and Wiese mention "[ʔalaın]
‘alone’" as a two-syllable root.
Golston and Wiese say that there were only five three-syllable roots in the database:
The five roots in our corpus that violate the alignment constraints twice are all loans and felt to be such by most speakers: [ʔaleːgʀo] ‘allegro,’ [baldʀiaːn] (name), [ʔɛnziaːn] (name), [feːbʀuaʀ] ‘February,’ and [januaʀ] ‘January.’
(page 75-Researchgate)
Based on this, I'm fairly certain that three-syllable noun stems would be extremely marginal if not nonexistent.
Without a look at the database, it's hard to tell how many of the two-syllable examples are "nativized loans": Golston and Wiese say that the database includes 792 roots of that type, so they could potentially account for almost all of the 131 two-syllable roots in the database.
Some of these do seem to be compounds: allein is transparently all- + ein-, cognate with English "alone" (all + one). It's also noteworthy that all five of their three-syllable roots are of Latin origin.
– Draconis
7 hours ago
add a comment |
I found an article "The structure of the German root", by Chris Golston and Richard Wiese (published online on ResearchGate in 1998; originally published in the book Phonology and Morphology of the Germanic Languages). The analysis in this article is based on a database adapted from a list made by Wolf Dieter Ortmann (1993), who created his database based on entries in root dictionaries, mainly Augst (1975).
The article has a footnote saying "At a later stage, we plan to make the database available through the internet" (p. 68-Researchgate). I haven't been able to find it, though.
On page 75 (Researchgate), the article says that there were 131 roots in the database with two syllables like Arbeit. This excludes words where the second syllable is schwa or a schwa + resonant/syllabic resonant, but the database includes some items considered "nativized loans" (Golston and Wiese give the examples "Abenteuer ‘adventure’, add- ‘add’, Akt ‘act’, Scharlach ‘scarlet fever’") (p. 68-ResearchGate). Also, the roots seem to be of all word classes: Golston and Wiese mention "[ʔalaın]
‘alone’" as a two-syllable root.
Golston and Wiese say that there were only five three-syllable roots in the database:
The five roots in our corpus that violate the alignment constraints twice are all loans and felt to be such by most speakers: [ʔaleːgʀo] ‘allegro,’ [baldʀiaːn] (name), [ʔɛnziaːn] (name), [feːbʀuaʀ] ‘February,’ and [januaʀ] ‘January.’
(page 75-Researchgate)
Based on this, I'm fairly certain that three-syllable noun stems would be extremely marginal if not nonexistent.
Without a look at the database, it's hard to tell how many of the two-syllable examples are "nativized loans": Golston and Wiese say that the database includes 792 roots of that type, so they could potentially account for almost all of the 131 two-syllable roots in the database.
Some of these do seem to be compounds: allein is transparently all- + ein-, cognate with English "alone" (all + one). It's also noteworthy that all five of their three-syllable roots are of Latin origin.
– Draconis
7 hours ago
add a comment |
I found an article "The structure of the German root", by Chris Golston and Richard Wiese (published online on ResearchGate in 1998; originally published in the book Phonology and Morphology of the Germanic Languages). The analysis in this article is based on a database adapted from a list made by Wolf Dieter Ortmann (1993), who created his database based on entries in root dictionaries, mainly Augst (1975).
The article has a footnote saying "At a later stage, we plan to make the database available through the internet" (p. 68-Researchgate). I haven't been able to find it, though.
On page 75 (Researchgate), the article says that there were 131 roots in the database with two syllables like Arbeit. This excludes words where the second syllable is schwa or a schwa + resonant/syllabic resonant, but the database includes some items considered "nativized loans" (Golston and Wiese give the examples "Abenteuer ‘adventure’, add- ‘add’, Akt ‘act’, Scharlach ‘scarlet fever’") (p. 68-ResearchGate). Also, the roots seem to be of all word classes: Golston and Wiese mention "[ʔalaın]
‘alone’" as a two-syllable root.
Golston and Wiese say that there were only five three-syllable roots in the database:
The five roots in our corpus that violate the alignment constraints twice are all loans and felt to be such by most speakers: [ʔaleːgʀo] ‘allegro,’ [baldʀiaːn] (name), [ʔɛnziaːn] (name), [feːbʀuaʀ] ‘February,’ and [januaʀ] ‘January.’
(page 75-Researchgate)
Based on this, I'm fairly certain that three-syllable noun stems would be extremely marginal if not nonexistent.
Without a look at the database, it's hard to tell how many of the two-syllable examples are "nativized loans": Golston and Wiese say that the database includes 792 roots of that type, so they could potentially account for almost all of the 131 two-syllable roots in the database.
I found an article "The structure of the German root", by Chris Golston and Richard Wiese (published online on ResearchGate in 1998; originally published in the book Phonology and Morphology of the Germanic Languages). The analysis in this article is based on a database adapted from a list made by Wolf Dieter Ortmann (1993), who created his database based on entries in root dictionaries, mainly Augst (1975).
The article has a footnote saying "At a later stage, we plan to make the database available through the internet" (p. 68-Researchgate). I haven't been able to find it, though.
On page 75 (Researchgate), the article says that there were 131 roots in the database with two syllables like Arbeit. This excludes words where the second syllable is schwa or a schwa + resonant/syllabic resonant, but the database includes some items considered "nativized loans" (Golston and Wiese give the examples "Abenteuer ‘adventure’, add- ‘add’, Akt ‘act’, Scharlach ‘scarlet fever’") (p. 68-ResearchGate). Also, the roots seem to be of all word classes: Golston and Wiese mention "[ʔalaın]
‘alone’" as a two-syllable root.
Golston and Wiese say that there were only five three-syllable roots in the database:
The five roots in our corpus that violate the alignment constraints twice are all loans and felt to be such by most speakers: [ʔaleːgʀo] ‘allegro,’ [baldʀiaːn] (name), [ʔɛnziaːn] (name), [feːbʀuaʀ] ‘February,’ and [januaʀ] ‘January.’
(page 75-Researchgate)
Based on this, I'm fairly certain that three-syllable noun stems would be extremely marginal if not nonexistent.
Without a look at the database, it's hard to tell how many of the two-syllable examples are "nativized loans": Golston and Wiese say that the database includes 792 roots of that type, so they could potentially account for almost all of the 131 two-syllable roots in the database.
edited 8 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
sumelicsumelic
10.7k12358
10.7k12358
Some of these do seem to be compounds: allein is transparently all- + ein-, cognate with English "alone" (all + one). It's also noteworthy that all five of their three-syllable roots are of Latin origin.
– Draconis
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Some of these do seem to be compounds: allein is transparently all- + ein-, cognate with English "alone" (all + one). It's also noteworthy that all five of their three-syllable roots are of Latin origin.
– Draconis
7 hours ago
Some of these do seem to be compounds: allein is transparently all- + ein-, cognate with English "alone" (all + one). It's also noteworthy that all five of their three-syllable roots are of Latin origin.
– Draconis
7 hours ago
Some of these do seem to be compounds: allein is transparently all- + ein-, cognate with English "alone" (all + one). It's also noteworthy that all five of their three-syllable roots are of Latin origin.
– Draconis
7 hours ago
add a comment |
There may be a few, but I can't think of any that you haven't already mentioned.
The reasons go back to Proto-Germanic. At some unknown point (after Grimm and Verner but before Common Germanic split, so probably within 100BCE - 100CE), the original Proto-Indo-European stress disappeared. Instead, Proto-Germanic stressed all words on the first syllable, and started to reduce unstressed vowels to nothingness.
At this point, no matter how long the original Proto-Germanic root had been, it began to collapse into a monosyllable: *ēmaitijǭ > OE ǣmette > ME amte > ModE "ant". This wasn't complete by the time Proto-Germanic split apart, and didn't go all the way in all the languages—but German, English, and Norse kept running with it, and took it as far as it could go.
Thus, in these three languages, almost all native Germanic roots are monosyllables, unless this would create an illegal consonant cluster. (This exception is why we see the native word "harvest" with two syllables, because the sequence *rvst isn't valid in English—compare German Herbst.) German also reduced most vowels in endings to schwa, where English went one step further and deleted them entirely: *xagatusjǭ with its feminine ending became OHG hagzisse > German Hexe, but OE hægtesse > ME hegge > English "hag".
So while there might be a few surviving polysyllabic Germanic roots in German, like Arbeit, I wouldn't expect many. There were plenty of such roots in Proto-Germanic, but sound changes have been working tirelessly to destroy them ever since.
P.S. I was taught that an Old Norse root was always a single syllable, without exception: anything longer was a compound, and consonants were deleted all over the place to keep the syllables pronounceable. But I don't know if this is actually true or not. Knowing how unpredictable language is, I'm cautious about any sort of "always".
Thanks! It's good to know that there were actual polysyllabic roots in Proto-Germanic. You also inadvertently suggested a word I had missed :D
– user3482545
51 mins ago
@user3482545 Oh? Which one?
– Draconis
49 mins ago
Perhaps User3482545 looked up *ēmaitijǭ and is talking about Ameise in the comment above.
– sumelic
39 mins ago
add a comment |
There may be a few, but I can't think of any that you haven't already mentioned.
The reasons go back to Proto-Germanic. At some unknown point (after Grimm and Verner but before Common Germanic split, so probably within 100BCE - 100CE), the original Proto-Indo-European stress disappeared. Instead, Proto-Germanic stressed all words on the first syllable, and started to reduce unstressed vowels to nothingness.
At this point, no matter how long the original Proto-Germanic root had been, it began to collapse into a monosyllable: *ēmaitijǭ > OE ǣmette > ME amte > ModE "ant". This wasn't complete by the time Proto-Germanic split apart, and didn't go all the way in all the languages—but German, English, and Norse kept running with it, and took it as far as it could go.
Thus, in these three languages, almost all native Germanic roots are monosyllables, unless this would create an illegal consonant cluster. (This exception is why we see the native word "harvest" with two syllables, because the sequence *rvst isn't valid in English—compare German Herbst.) German also reduced most vowels in endings to schwa, where English went one step further and deleted them entirely: *xagatusjǭ with its feminine ending became OHG hagzisse > German Hexe, but OE hægtesse > ME hegge > English "hag".
So while there might be a few surviving polysyllabic Germanic roots in German, like Arbeit, I wouldn't expect many. There were plenty of such roots in Proto-Germanic, but sound changes have been working tirelessly to destroy them ever since.
P.S. I was taught that an Old Norse root was always a single syllable, without exception: anything longer was a compound, and consonants were deleted all over the place to keep the syllables pronounceable. But I don't know if this is actually true or not. Knowing how unpredictable language is, I'm cautious about any sort of "always".
Thanks! It's good to know that there were actual polysyllabic roots in Proto-Germanic. You also inadvertently suggested a word I had missed :D
– user3482545
51 mins ago
@user3482545 Oh? Which one?
– Draconis
49 mins ago
Perhaps User3482545 looked up *ēmaitijǭ and is talking about Ameise in the comment above.
– sumelic
39 mins ago
add a comment |
There may be a few, but I can't think of any that you haven't already mentioned.
The reasons go back to Proto-Germanic. At some unknown point (after Grimm and Verner but before Common Germanic split, so probably within 100BCE - 100CE), the original Proto-Indo-European stress disappeared. Instead, Proto-Germanic stressed all words on the first syllable, and started to reduce unstressed vowels to nothingness.
At this point, no matter how long the original Proto-Germanic root had been, it began to collapse into a monosyllable: *ēmaitijǭ > OE ǣmette > ME amte > ModE "ant". This wasn't complete by the time Proto-Germanic split apart, and didn't go all the way in all the languages—but German, English, and Norse kept running with it, and took it as far as it could go.
Thus, in these three languages, almost all native Germanic roots are monosyllables, unless this would create an illegal consonant cluster. (This exception is why we see the native word "harvest" with two syllables, because the sequence *rvst isn't valid in English—compare German Herbst.) German also reduced most vowels in endings to schwa, where English went one step further and deleted them entirely: *xagatusjǭ with its feminine ending became OHG hagzisse > German Hexe, but OE hægtesse > ME hegge > English "hag".
So while there might be a few surviving polysyllabic Germanic roots in German, like Arbeit, I wouldn't expect many. There were plenty of such roots in Proto-Germanic, but sound changes have been working tirelessly to destroy them ever since.
P.S. I was taught that an Old Norse root was always a single syllable, without exception: anything longer was a compound, and consonants were deleted all over the place to keep the syllables pronounceable. But I don't know if this is actually true or not. Knowing how unpredictable language is, I'm cautious about any sort of "always".
There may be a few, but I can't think of any that you haven't already mentioned.
The reasons go back to Proto-Germanic. At some unknown point (after Grimm and Verner but before Common Germanic split, so probably within 100BCE - 100CE), the original Proto-Indo-European stress disappeared. Instead, Proto-Germanic stressed all words on the first syllable, and started to reduce unstressed vowels to nothingness.
At this point, no matter how long the original Proto-Germanic root had been, it began to collapse into a monosyllable: *ēmaitijǭ > OE ǣmette > ME amte > ModE "ant". This wasn't complete by the time Proto-Germanic split apart, and didn't go all the way in all the languages—but German, English, and Norse kept running with it, and took it as far as it could go.
Thus, in these three languages, almost all native Germanic roots are monosyllables, unless this would create an illegal consonant cluster. (This exception is why we see the native word "harvest" with two syllables, because the sequence *rvst isn't valid in English—compare German Herbst.) German also reduced most vowels in endings to schwa, where English went one step further and deleted them entirely: *xagatusjǭ with its feminine ending became OHG hagzisse > German Hexe, but OE hægtesse > ME hegge > English "hag".
So while there might be a few surviving polysyllabic Germanic roots in German, like Arbeit, I wouldn't expect many. There were plenty of such roots in Proto-Germanic, but sound changes have been working tirelessly to destroy them ever since.
P.S. I was taught that an Old Norse root was always a single syllable, without exception: anything longer was a compound, and consonants were deleted all over the place to keep the syllables pronounceable. But I don't know if this is actually true or not. Knowing how unpredictable language is, I'm cautious about any sort of "always".
answered 9 hours ago
DraconisDraconis
14.7k12359
14.7k12359
Thanks! It's good to know that there were actual polysyllabic roots in Proto-Germanic. You also inadvertently suggested a word I had missed :D
– user3482545
51 mins ago
@user3482545 Oh? Which one?
– Draconis
49 mins ago
Perhaps User3482545 looked up *ēmaitijǭ and is talking about Ameise in the comment above.
– sumelic
39 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks! It's good to know that there were actual polysyllabic roots in Proto-Germanic. You also inadvertently suggested a word I had missed :D
– user3482545
51 mins ago
@user3482545 Oh? Which one?
– Draconis
49 mins ago
Perhaps User3482545 looked up *ēmaitijǭ and is talking about Ameise in the comment above.
– sumelic
39 mins ago
Thanks! It's good to know that there were actual polysyllabic roots in Proto-Germanic. You also inadvertently suggested a word I had missed :D
– user3482545
51 mins ago
Thanks! It's good to know that there were actual polysyllabic roots in Proto-Germanic. You also inadvertently suggested a word I had missed :D
– user3482545
51 mins ago
@user3482545 Oh? Which one?
– Draconis
49 mins ago
@user3482545 Oh? Which one?
– Draconis
49 mins ago
Perhaps User3482545 looked up *ēmaitijǭ and is talking about Ameise in the comment above.
– sumelic
39 mins ago
Perhaps User3482545 looked up *ēmaitijǭ and is talking about Ameise in the comment above.
– sumelic
39 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Linguistics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31490%2fgerman-noun-roots-of-germanic-origin-with-multiple-non-schwa-syllables%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown