My dictionary has "werwulf" as a pronunciation guide (vs. "weerwulf") -
I can't use phonetic symbols here. In other words, one may say
"wearwulf" or "weerwulf." I don't believe "werwolf" is an accepted
spelling, but am open to correction.
Just call me Pedantica.
KW
Bill East wrote:
>
> We've had an interesting discussion on Werewolves, but I think I alone
> have used the correct spelling, others perhaps lacking an extra e on
> their keyboards. I'm surprised that Mr Crockett (Doctor Pedanticus)
> hasn't picked you up on this. Are you mellowing, Crockers?
>
> Actually I see that the dictionary allows the spelling without the
> second e, so I retract.
>
> The word is formed from OE wer, a man + wulf, a wolf. Like Latin and
> Greek, OE has two words for man, wer (cognate with Latin vir) which
> means a male person, a man as opposed to a woman, and mann, a human
> being of either sex, cognate with Latin homo (not obviously cognate,
> but if you consider the accusative ho-min-em or the adjective
> hu-man-us, you see the resemblance).
>
> It has sometimes occurred to me during the controversies about
> inclusive language that some of the difficulties might have been
> circumvented if we had resurrected the word 'wer' when wishing to
> refer to males, and kept 'man' in its former unisex sense - a sense
> which it retains, actually, in the North East; I have often heard
> Sunderland women referring to each other as 'man' which sounds a little
> odd to a southern ear.
>
> :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
>
> Doctor Elasticus.
> ____________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
> or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|