6:16 Interesting thing about Ear ᛠ. “Heard” used to be the way they said “hard”. So one could say that the English also had a similar sound development to the frisians in some cases
Thank you for explaining the process by which the rune row changed so clearly. It's amazing how many people seem to be under the mistaken impression that they just changed overnight at some point. I like your theory for the origin of the shape of ᛠ. Given how ᚣ places ᛁ inside ᚢ, I had wondered if ᛠ might have been ᛁ broken on top of it itself, but your idea is much more rational.
I would like to ask your stance on using the old z rune as x, as this feels to me less a native decision and more something brought about only by the need to transliterate latin. I would also like to ask how authentic Gar and the new K rune are, as before this video I had been only using the "core" 28 runes, using the old z rune as a k, Cēn for ch, Gifu for G, and the j rune for the j phoneme in all contexts. I am very passionate about historical accuracy and trying best to fit it to the modern day, I have seen you in the Anglish subreddit and elsewhere and hope we are someone likeminded, but I know I have more to learn. Unfortunately I have not the resources or time to significantly, I feel, improve my own means of learning, which is why I'm asking this now rather than trying to consult and study old runic inscriptions.
I don't see a conflict between "native decision" and "transliterate Latin". This Z-to-X development occurred long before the Norman Invasion. I don't see how one could argue it wasn't a native decision. Calc ᛣ is found on: the Bewcastle Cross; (supposedly) the Blythburgh Writing Tablet; the Bramham Moor Ring; the Great Urswick Stone; the Kingmoor Ring; the Ruthwell Cross; Thornhill Stone 3. Gar ᚸ is found on the Ruthwell Cross and maybe the Bewcastle Cross.
@@Hurlebatte I guess I mean in the sense that, without Latin as a motifying factor, would runemasters have readapted the rune to "x" anyways? And thank you for the inscription corpus! I am glad that this opens me up to using new runes I have done some work with dalecarian runes, looking mainly at which were most commonly used, the oldest attestations, and then trying to create a mostly none-roman affected futhark. When doing this I knowticed that the one rune that seemed to be lost permanently, replaced by latin even in the late 16th century, was the D rune. However I wonder, could this be a native simplification of the original D rune, simply cutting it in half? It seems to me that the D rune was always very similar to latin, only being mirrored to itself and then "jaggedized" to fit the format of all runes as they are carved. I also know thst as runes come from an old italic script the relation isn't unfounded. Normally I would write it off as influence but I then look at how novel some of the new dalecarian runes were, inventing a G rune that looks based off of R, and seemingly randomly reassigning new phonemes to new unused runes (which is partially on topic).
My guess is that the Z-to-X development was based on Latin influence and wouldn't've occurred without knowledge of the Latin alphabet. Still, the development occurred while Futhorc was a living script, and before the Norman Invasion, so I'd say the decision was native in the sense that Futhorc-using Englishmen made the decision. By the time of Dalecarlian runes, North Germanic speakers hadn't used ᛞ in like 700 years (see "Östergötland Runic Inscription 43"). There are other features of the Dalecarlian runes that seem like Latin influence, so I think Latin influence is a simpler explanation for that Dalecarlian D you're talking about.
Hello! Interesting video! I have a question regarding the writing of the runes Uruz, Ingwaz, and Raido. I've often noticed that in rune inscriptions from the Elder Futhark, the Uruz rune looks like an inverted V, but the form I see most frequently, including in your video, is the one where it points downwards. Do both of these variants belong to the Elder Futhark or not? Regarding the Raido rune, in inscriptions, its leg often appears separate in the middle, apart from the vertical line. Is it correct to connect these lines? And for the Ingwaz rune, should it be a diamond or a square? Thank you in advance for your response!
I just discovered that Orm used "ȝȝ" to represent /i/ but "ȝȝh" to represent /ɣ/. Might that lend weight to your idea about how the sound of ᛇ changed?
I'm not sure people were still very familiar with Futhorc in the 1100s, so I wouldn't be quick to link spelling conventions in the 1100s to Futhorc. I haven't heard about Orm using ȝȝ to stand for /i/. What's that from?
@@Hurlebatte I thought I already replied to this but it seems YT deleted my response, possibly because I included a link to the source you requested. The information can be found on page 197 of "The Stories of English" (2004) by David Crystal. To again correct what I said last month, Orm used "ȝȝ" for [i] but "ȝh" for [ɣ] (not "ȝȝh"). In regards to your query, though you're right that by that time runes weren't generally being taught in England anymore, Orm's very name is an Old Norse name. Again, the part of England he lived in had what might be called a degree of affinity to the Danelaw. So given that Younger Futhark was still in use in Orm's day, and Futhorc had only comparatively recently fallen out of use, would it really be too grant a stretch to suppose that he had some awareness of runes? Does it not seem a little coincidental that he used ȝ in relation to 2 of the sounds associated with ᛇ?
"The information can be found on page 197 of The Stories of English" Can you quote the book and give an example of a word where ȝȝ stands for [i]? "Does it not seem a little coincidental" Well, ȝ stood for [ɣ] and /j/ since ȝ was a "G letter" and those were "G sounds". If Orm really did use ȝȝ to stand for /i/ my bet would be that the /i/ value was an extension of the /j/ value.
@@Hurlebatte That would make sense as the word is "maȝȝ". The book says: "The dominating graphic feature of the opening lines of the _Orrmulum_ is the use of double consonants marking short vowels. These lines also contain examples of some of Orrm's other spelling conventions. He was particularly careful to distinguish the different kinds of sound represented by _ȝ_ in Old English: - _ȝ_ shows that the sound is [j], as in _yet_ , written _ȝé́t_ ; - _ȝȝ_ shows that it is an [i] sound at the end of a diphthong, as in _may_ , written _maȝȝ_ ; - _ȝh_ shows that it is a type of consonant sound, a voiced velar fricative [ɣ], as in _hallȝhe_ 'holy'. The double acute accent on _ȝé́t_ is interesting, as it gives a hint of Orrm's reasoning." Shall I continue?
I don't think there's consensus on when ᛇ was first associated with [ç]. ᚻ was a valid rune for [ç], but since ᚻ handled [h], [x], and [ç], and since ᛇ was totally redundant, I guess it felt right to take [x] and [ç] from ᚻ and give them to ᛇ.
It's cool to see how the rune shapes become something else over time.
Did the elder futhark have ᛡ for an /a/ type sound and then it disappeared and then reappeared as an /i:/ sound (maybe as a bind of ᛁᚷ)?
I think ᛡ only ended up as an /a/ type rune among Proto-Norse speakers.
Among Anglo-Frisian speakers, ᛡ remained a /j/ type rune.
6:16 Interesting thing about Ear ᛠ. “Heard” used to be the way they said “hard”. So one could say that the English also had a similar sound development to the frisians in some cases
Thank you for explaining the process by which the rune row changed so clearly. It's amazing how many people seem to be under the mistaken impression that they just changed overnight at some point. I like your theory for the origin of the shape of ᛠ. Given how ᚣ places ᛁ inside ᚢ, I had wondered if ᛠ might have been ᛁ broken on top of it itself, but your idea is much more rational.
Thanks for yer comment, lol.
As for the origin of ᛠ, I'm just passing along a theory I read in some book or article. I forget which.
I would like to ask your stance on using the old z rune as x, as this feels to me less a native decision and more something brought about only by the need to transliterate latin.
I would also like to ask how authentic Gar and the new K rune are, as before this video I had been only using the "core" 28 runes, using the old z rune as a k, Cēn for ch, Gifu for G, and the j rune for the j phoneme in all contexts.
I am very passionate about historical accuracy and trying best to fit it to the modern day, I have seen you in the Anglish subreddit and elsewhere and hope we are someone likeminded, but I know I have more to learn. Unfortunately I have not the resources or time to significantly, I feel, improve my own means of learning, which is why I'm asking this now rather than trying to consult and study old runic inscriptions.
I don't see a conflict between "native decision" and "transliterate Latin". This Z-to-X development occurred long before the Norman Invasion. I don't see how one could argue it wasn't a native decision.
Calc ᛣ is found on: the Bewcastle Cross; (supposedly) the Blythburgh Writing Tablet; the Bramham Moor Ring; the Great Urswick Stone; the Kingmoor Ring; the Ruthwell Cross; Thornhill Stone 3. Gar ᚸ is found on the Ruthwell Cross and maybe the Bewcastle Cross.
@@Hurlebatte I guess I mean in the sense that, without Latin as a motifying factor, would runemasters have readapted the rune to "x" anyways?
And thank you for the inscription corpus! I am glad that this opens me up to using new runes
I have done some work with dalecarian runes, looking mainly at which were most commonly used, the oldest attestations, and then trying to create a mostly none-roman affected futhark. When doing this I knowticed that the one rune that seemed to be lost permanently, replaced by latin even in the late 16th century, was the D rune. However I wonder, could this be a native simplification of the original D rune, simply cutting it in half? It seems to me that the D rune was always very similar to latin, only being mirrored to itself and then "jaggedized" to fit the format of all runes as they are carved. I also know thst as runes come from an old italic script the relation isn't unfounded. Normally I would write it off as influence but I then look at how novel some of the new dalecarian runes were, inventing a G rune that looks based off of R, and seemingly randomly reassigning new phonemes to new unused runes (which is partially on topic).
My guess is that the Z-to-X development was based on Latin influence and wouldn't've occurred without knowledge of the Latin alphabet. Still, the development occurred while Futhorc was a living script, and before the Norman Invasion, so I'd say the decision was native in the sense that Futhorc-using Englishmen made the decision.
By the time of Dalecarlian runes, North Germanic speakers hadn't used ᛞ in like 700 years (see "Östergötland Runic Inscription 43"). There are other features of the Dalecarlian runes that seem like Latin influence, so I think Latin influence is a simpler explanation for that Dalecarlian D you're talking about.
@@Hurlebatte That all makes sense! Thank you so much for taking the time to answer my questions, I love your videos and hope you the best!
no problum
Hello! Interesting video! I have a question regarding the writing of the runes Uruz, Ingwaz, and Raido. I've often noticed that in rune inscriptions from the Elder Futhark, the Uruz rune looks like an inverted V, but the form I see most frequently, including in your video, is the one where it points downwards. Do both of these variants belong to the Elder Futhark or not? Regarding the Raido rune, in inscriptions, its leg often appears separate in the middle, apart from the vertical line. Is it correct to connect these lines? And for the Ingwaz rune, should it be a diamond or a square? Thank you in advance for your response!
þank you
ᛣᚢᛚ᛫ᛒᛠᚾᛋ
ᛡᚫᚫᚫᛋ
Thanx for video😊
Yer welcome. 🦭
I just discovered that Orm used "ȝȝ" to represent /i/ but "ȝȝh" to represent /ɣ/. Might that lend weight to your idea about how the sound of ᛇ changed?
I'm not sure people were still very familiar with Futhorc in the 1100s, so I wouldn't be quick to link spelling conventions in the 1100s to Futhorc. I haven't heard about Orm using ȝȝ to stand for /i/. What's that from?
@@Hurlebatte I thought I already replied to this but it seems YT deleted my response, possibly because I included a link to the source you requested. The information can be found on page 197 of "The Stories of English" (2004) by David Crystal.
To again correct what I said last month, Orm used "ȝȝ" for [i] but "ȝh" for [ɣ] (not "ȝȝh").
In regards to your query, though you're right that by that time runes weren't generally being taught in England anymore, Orm's very name is an Old Norse name. Again, the part of England he lived in had what might be called a degree of affinity to the Danelaw. So given that Younger Futhark was still in use in Orm's day, and Futhorc had only comparatively recently fallen out of use, would it really be too grant a stretch to suppose that he had some awareness of runes? Does it not seem a little coincidental that he used ȝ in relation to 2 of the sounds associated with ᛇ?
"The information can be found on page 197 of The Stories of English"
Can you quote the book and give an example of a word where ȝȝ stands for [i]?
"Does it not seem a little coincidental"
Well, ȝ stood for [ɣ] and /j/ since ȝ was a "G letter" and those were "G sounds". If Orm really did use ȝȝ to stand for /i/ my bet would be that the /i/ value was an extension of the /j/ value.
@@Hurlebatte That would make sense as the word is "maȝȝ".
The book says:
"The dominating graphic feature of the opening lines of the _Orrmulum_ is the use of double consonants marking short vowels. These lines also contain examples of some of Orrm's other spelling conventions. He was particularly careful to distinguish the different kinds of sound represented by _ȝ_ in Old English:
- _ȝ_ shows that the sound is [j], as in _yet_ , written _ȝé́t_ ;
- _ȝȝ_ shows that it is an [i] sound at the end of a diphthong, as in _may_ , written _maȝȝ_ ;
- _ȝh_ shows that it is a type of consonant sound, a voiced velar fricative [ɣ], as in _hallȝhe_ 'holy'.
The double acute accent on _ȝé́t_ is interesting, as it gives a hint of Orrm's reasoning."
Shall I continue?
Yeah that's an extension of G in Old English making /j/.
When ᛇ began to be associated with /ç/, wasn’t ᚻ already a valid rune for that sound?
I don't think there's consensus on when ᛇ was first associated with [ç].
ᚻ was a valid rune for [ç], but since ᚻ handled [h], [x], and [ç], and since ᛇ was totally redundant, I guess it felt right to take [x] and [ç] from ᚻ and give them to ᛇ.