Jordan (3^rd ed.) p.223: “Erst im 15. Jahrh. dringt auch im Süden die genauere Nachbildung des frz. Lautes ǒnion [...], spaniel für oinon, spainel ein”.

1248 is a bit early, but nevertheless if we allow French influence on the spelling of Manningtree, could forms such as Main- be interpreted as reverse spellings for /manj/?

Dennington still puzzles me – I have now assembled over 50 different spellings, which include only 3 in De- (including one in DB). So if the origin is really Dēnegifu, we have to explain not only this, but also why the name has reverted to Den-. Did Dēnegifu have a hypocoristic *Dinne? (She was apparently a major landowner – 7 scattered estates are said in DB to be assessed under Dennington.)

Keith

From: The English Place-Name List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Richard Coates
Sent: 21 August 2013 12:20
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Manningtree (Essex)

What Ekwall does at Dennington is a bit woolly. Like other scholars of his generation, he accepts that [e] > [i] happens in certain circs, particularly adjacent to what Mawer and Stenton refer to as “point consonants”, i.e. apicoalveolars. Ekwall is ignorant of developments in phonology that hadn’t happened by the time he wrote, so doesn’t think in terms of phonemes or distinctive features, and I don’t think his phonetics is very sophisticated either. I suspect what he means in this entry is that the [n] may be influenced by the [j] that follows and has therefore possibly an even more raised tongue-tip than usual, flattened out by the need to pronounce the following [j] so that it resembles a laminoalveolar, which sort-of resembles a dorso-prepalatal, and that is what causes raising of [e] > [i]. But others including M&S are content to think that adjacent apicoalveolars are sufficient to cause the raising of front vowels. I don’t think that Ekwall is claiming the first <n> represents a true (pre-)palatal, and even if he were I don’t think it’s a necessary assumption to account for the raising.

Richard

From: The English Place-Name List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Keith Briggs
Sent: 21 August 2013 11:43
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [EPNL] Manningtree (Essex)

The one I have is:

@book{Jordan:ME,

author="Richard Jordan",

title="Handbuch der mittelenglischen Grammatik: Lautlehre",

edition=3,

year=1968,

publisher="Carl Winter",

address="Heidelberg",

}

If I recall correctly, Ekwall DEPN has something to say on this point under Dennington.

Keith

From: The English Place-Name List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Insley
Sent: 14 August 2013 12:31
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Manningtree (Essex)

Jordan doesn't and his is the account that one turns to first. Perhaps Keith should consult his copy of Jordan-Matthes (not that dreadful English translation by Crook).

----- Original Message -----

From: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">Richard Coates

To: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]

Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 11:16 AM

Subject: Re: [EPNL] Manningtree (Essex)

I don’t know of any standard description of ME that recognizes a phoneme /ñ/.

R

From: The English Place-Name List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Keith Briggs
Sent: 21 August 2013 10:53
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [EPNL] Manningtree (Essex)

Did the language have /ñ/ at this period? For Dennington Sf (<Dēnegifu), there are spellings with <gn> hinting at /nj/> /ñ/.

If that is right, perhaps <yn> also represents /ñ/ developing from manig?

Keith

From: The English Place-Name List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Richard Coates
Sent: 21 August 2013 10:35
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Manningtree (Essex)

The trouble is that if you get an explanation for the Mayn- forms and similar it will undermine any explanation of the dominant Mani- etc. forms. I suspect a minim error in the 1248 Assize Roll forms, where Menitre and Meintre are said to alternate. If you take the latter as a minim error for the former, the few other, mainly late, suspect forms (1285, 1436, 1490, 1535, 1563) could be taken as bureaucratic copyings or interpretations of the tradition begun by the second, on this hypothesis defective, 1248 form. Neither the earliest forms nor the modern name suggest gemǣne or any alternative with a diphthong.

Richard

From: The English Place-Name List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jeremy Harte
Sent: 21 August 2013 10:16
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [EPNL] Manningtree (Essex)

Agreed, and I’m no judge of vowels, but even if gemǣne trēow was a phonologically plausible origin for Manningtree, what would it mean? ‘Tree used in common’? A couple of examples of *gemǣne stān or something on those lines indicating a ‘standing on the border’ sense for gemǣne would make me a convert.

Jeremy Harte

From: The English Place-Name List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Keith Briggs
Sent: 21 August 2013 10:02
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Manningtree (Essex)

That may be right, but my question was more about the phonology of the first vowel.

Keith

From: The English Place-Name List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jeremy Harte
Sent: 20 August 2013 14:51
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Manningtree (Essex)

I’d thought that gemǣne was more likely to mean ‘held in common, used as a common resource’ rather than ‘common to, on the boundary of’ (although many heaths, woods etc. were both intercommoned and on boundaries).

Jeremy Harte

From: The English Place-Name List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Keith Briggs
Sent: 20 August 2013 10:24
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Manningtree (Essex)

If Manningtree is either ‘Manna’s tree’ or ‘many trees’ (PN Essex 343), why are there spellings such as the following?

Mein- 1248

Mayn- 1285, 1563

Meyn- 1436

Main- 1490

Is gemǣne a possibility for the first element? (Being on the border of Suffolk, the tree would be common to two counties).

Keith

PS: Does not Smith (EPNE s.v.) err in making gemǣne cognate with mann? (Usually it is put with German gemein.)
 
 
This message has been scanned and no issues discovered.
                                      Click here to report this email as spam
 
 
********************************************************************
The information contained in this message is confidential and may be 
legally privileged. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s).
If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
use, dissemination, or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be 
unlawful.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the 
sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
 
Visit the Epsom and Ewell Borough Council website at www.epsom-ewell.gov.uk
********************************************************************
 