Inskrypcja na grocie rozwadowskiej włóczni (KJ35): ik eruls czy ik erlas?

The Rozwadów spearhead inscription (KJ 35): ik eruls or ik erlas? The paper discusses two possible interpretations of the (East Germanic?) runic inscription found in Rozwadów, Poland (KJ35), which reads ]krlus. Two alternatives are proposed: (1) [i]k (e)r(u)ls, and (2) [i]k (e)rlas, both with th...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Piotr Garbacz
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	DE EN FR PL RU
Publicado:	Ksiegarnia Akademicka Publishing 2016
Materias:	gocki inskrypcje w starszym futharku języki wschodniogermańskie erilar jarl KJ35 Language. Linguistic theory. Comparative grammar P101-410
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/1cffdd77975a425eb13421775241a180
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:1cffdd77975a425eb13421775241a180
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:1cffdd77975a425eb13421775241a1802021-11-27T13:01:24ZInskrypcja na grocie rozwadowskiej włóczni (KJ35): ik eruls czy ik erlas?10.12797/LV.11.2016.21.021896-21222392-1226https://doaj.org/article/1cffdd77975a425eb13421775241a1802016-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://journals.akademicka.pl/lv/article/view/2685https://doaj.org/toc/1896-2122https://doaj.org/toc/2392-1226 The Rozwadów spearhead inscription (KJ 35): ik eruls or ik erlas? The paper discusses two possible interpretations of the (East Germanic?) runic inscription found in Rozwadów, Poland (KJ35), which reads ]krlus. Two alternatives are proposed: (1) [i]k (e)r(u)ls, and (2) [i]k (e)rlas, both with the meaning ‘I belong to the Heruli’. The first alternative assumes that the rune kaunan is a remainder of the first person personal pronoun ik ‘I’ known from Gothic, whereas the preceding rune isaz has been destroyed as the spearhead is broken just before kaunan. Then, the expected rune ehwaz is absent; we can either guess it was destroyed, or never written at all. The last assumption here is a metathesis of uruz and laguz from the intended eruls to the attested (e)rlus, and the syncope in a-stems. The second alternative is similar but it argues that the last but one rune should be read ansuz, not uruz, and moreover, it assumes neither the metathesis of uruz and laguz, nor the syncope in a-stems. If the inscription ]krlus is to be read [i]k (e)r(u)ls, it would contain the only known Germanic attestation of a continuant of the Proto-Germanic erulaz, later to yield the Old Norse form jǫrull. If, on the other hand, it is to be interpreted as [i]k (e)rlas, it would be the only attestation of a continuant of the Proto-Germanic form erlaz predating Old Norse jarl. Both hypotheses show that the inscription is of great importance for the studies on the (phonetic) development of the word known from Proto-Nordic as erilar. Piotr GarbaczKsiegarnia Akademicka Publishingarticlegockiinskrypcje w starszym futharkujęzyki wschodniogermańskieerilarjarlKJ35Language. Linguistic theory. Comparative grammarP101-410DEENFRPLRULingVaria, Vol 11, Iss 21 (2016)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	DE EN FR PL RU
topic	gocki inskrypcje w starszym futharku języki wschodniogermańskie erilar jarl KJ35 Language. Linguistic theory. Comparative grammar P101-410
spellingShingle	gocki inskrypcje w starszym futharku języki wschodniogermańskie erilar jarl KJ35 Language. Linguistic theory. Comparative grammar P101-410 Piotr Garbacz Inskrypcja na grocie rozwadowskiej włóczni (KJ35): ik eruls czy ik erlas?
description	The Rozwadów spearhead inscription (KJ 35): ik eruls or ik erlas? The paper discusses two possible interpretations of the (East Germanic?) runic inscription found in Rozwadów, Poland (KJ35), which reads ]krlus. Two alternatives are proposed: (1) [i]k (e)r(u)ls, and (2) [i]k (e)rlas, both with the meaning ‘I belong to the Heruli’. The first alternative assumes that the rune kaunan is a remainder of the first person personal pronoun ik ‘I’ known from Gothic, whereas the preceding rune isaz has been destroyed as the spearhead is broken just before kaunan. Then, the expected rune ehwaz is absent; we can either guess it was destroyed, or never written at all. The last assumption here is a metathesis of uruz and laguz from the intended eruls to the attested (e)rlus, and the syncope in a-stems. The second alternative is similar but it argues that the last but one rune should be read ansuz, not uruz, and moreover, it assumes neither the metathesis of uruz and laguz, nor the syncope in a-stems. If the inscription ]krlus is to be read [i]k (e)r(u)ls, it would contain the only known Germanic attestation of a continuant of the Proto-Germanic erulaz, later to yield the Old Norse form jǫrull. If, on the other hand, it is to be interpreted as [i]k (e)rlas, it would be the only attestation of a continuant of the Proto-Germanic form erlaz predating Old Norse jarl. Both hypotheses show that the inscription is of great importance for the studies on the (phonetic) development of the word known from Proto-Nordic as erilar.
format	article
author	Piotr Garbacz
author_facet	Piotr Garbacz
author_sort	Piotr Garbacz
title	Inskrypcja na grocie rozwadowskiej włóczni (KJ35): ik eruls czy ik erlas?
title_short	Inskrypcja na grocie rozwadowskiej włóczni (KJ35): ik eruls czy ik erlas?
title_full	Inskrypcja na grocie rozwadowskiej włóczni (KJ35): ik eruls czy ik erlas?
title_fullStr	Inskrypcja na grocie rozwadowskiej włóczni (KJ35): ik eruls czy ik erlas?
title_full_unstemmed	Inskrypcja na grocie rozwadowskiej włóczni (KJ35): ik eruls czy ik erlas?
title_sort	inskrypcja na grocie rozwadowskiej włóczni (kj35): ik eruls czy ik erlas?
publisher	Ksiegarnia Akademicka Publishing
publishDate	2016
url	https://doaj.org/article/1cffdd77975a425eb13421775241a180
work_keys_str_mv	AT piotrgarbacz inskrypcjanagrocierozwadowskiejwłocznikj35ikerulsczyikerlas
_version_	1718408851267518464

Inskrypcja na grocie rozwadowskiej włóczni (KJ35): ik eruls czy ik erlas?

Ejemplares similares