- I am indebted to Prof. Herbert Prnzl and Prof. Hans Kurath for valuable suggestions.
- For a recent discussion of the problem of umlaut and a summary of previous viewpoints, see H. Penzl, “Umlaut and Secondary Umlaut in OHG,” Language XXV (1949) 223–240. Following his practice (cf. p. 224), I call i, ī, j “the i- sounds.” For a history of investigation to en. 1933, see W. Streitberg, V. Michels, and M. J. Jellinek, Die Erforschung der indogermanischen Sprachen, II, I, “Germanisch,” Berlin, 1936, pp. 381–395. It should be noted that a before i- sounds was not umlauted when certain consonant clusters (“umlaut-hindering consonants”) intervened, especially in Upper German (W. Braune and W. Mitzka, Althochdeutsche Grammatik, 8th ed., Tübingen, 1953 § 27, Anmerkung 2).
- Wherever it is necessary to distinguish between graphic signs and sounds, I enclose the graphic sign in single quotes.
- J. Franck, Altfränkische Grammatik, Göttingen, 1909, §§ 4, 13.3. For umlaut-e we find occasionally (mostly in earlier mss.) ‘ae’, ‘ei’: for e, we find ‘æ’, ‘ae’, ‘e’ (Franck, §§ 13.3, 15). For the most part the same sign is used for both e and ë (Penzl, op. cit., 225 f.).
- Cf. H. Paul and L. E. Schmitt, Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik, 16th ed., Tübingen, 1953, § 5.3.
- Karl von Bahder, Grundlagen des neuhochdeutschen Lautsystems, Strassburg, 1890, pp. 104–154.
- Following the usual practice in works on MGH and OHG, I use e and ë to indicate both a pronunciation type and an etymological equivalence (ë = botḥ open e and the reflex of Germanic * e; e = both close e and Germanic * a by i- umlaut), in order that the points made here may stand out clearer. One still finds the opinion occasionally expressed that all MHG ë's are from Germanic * e and that all MHG e's are from Germanic * a (cf. J. Fourquet, “The Two E's of MHG: A Diachronic Phonemic Approach,” Word VIII (1952), p. 122 and passim; also Wilmanns, Deutsche Grammatik, Vol. I, Strassburg, 1897, § 197. Anmerkung 2). The work of Paul, Luick and von Bahder has made this position untenable (cf. below, footnotes 16, 17, 18).
- See especially K. Luick, “Die Qualität der mhd. e nach den lebenden Dialekten,” PBB XI (1886) 492–517. For a discussion of the older view (ë = close e, e = open e) see Streitberg-Michels-Jellinek, p. 381 ff.
- W. F. Twaddell, “A Note on OHG Umlaut,” Monatshefte für deutschen Unterricht XXX (1938), 177–181, especially 180 f.; Penzl, op. cit., p. 225 f.
- Fourquet, op. cit.
- Twaddell, p. 180 f.
- Fourquet, p. 124.
- Loc. cit. Cf. also H. Paul, “Nachträgliches zum germanischen Vokalismus,” PBB (1887) 548–554. As far as I can determine, Paul was the first to suggest that there was a time both e's were phonetically indistinguishable. Paul's point of view was attacked by Wilmanns (op. cit., § 197) on the grounds that the two e's might have been differentiated “durch andre Momente als durch die offene und geschlossene Aussprache”.
- Fourquet, p. 23.
- Cf. W. Streitberg, Urgermanische Grammatik, Heidelberg, 1896, § 63, H. Hirt, Handbuch des Urgermanischen, Vol. I, Heidelberg, 1931, p. 43 f.; E. Prokosch, A Comparative Germanic Grammar, Philadelphia, 1939, § 38, R. Priebsch and W. Collinson, The German Language, 3rd ed., London, 1948, p. 135. This coupled with the fact that every * i became * e before *ă, *æ, has led at least two scholars to state that * i and * e were members of the same phoneme in Proto-Germanic (G. Trager and H. L. Smith, “A Chronology of I-H,” SIL (1950), pp. 69, 70). Meillet (Caractères généraus des langues germaniques, 4th ed., Paris, 1930, p. 61) and Prokosch (op.cit., p. 113) believed that * i and * e were “almost” members of the same phoneme in Proto-Germanic. W. F. Twaddell (“The Prehistoric Germanic Short Syllabics,” Language XXIV (1948) 139–151) and J. Kuryłowicz (“The Germanic Vowel System”, Bulletin of Ihe Polish Academy (1952), 51–54) consider * i and * e to be separate phonemes, although Kuryłowicz (p. 52 f.) believes that * i and * e were members of the same phoneme in Pre-OHG. It is not central to my argument here, but it is my belief that we must agree with Kuryłowicz. In reconstructing the allophones of a proto-language, we cannot expect to be able to reconstruct complete complementation.
- This was first noted by H. Paul; cf. his “Zur Geschichte des germanischen Vokalismus,” PBB VI (1879) 85. His findings were supplemented by Luick (cf. footnote 8), and by Fr. Kauffmann, “Geschlossenes e aus ē; vor i,” PBB XIII (1888) 393 f.
- Paul, “Nachträgliches zum germanischen Vokalismus,” 549. Cf. also the authorities cited in footnote 16 and Karl von Bahder, op. cit., p. 132 ff.
- Thus the pratice of stating that ‘ë’ both signals an open e-sound and derives from Germanic * e and that ‘e’ both signals a close e-sound and derives from Germanic * a must be given up. We must decide to use ‘ë’ either as a representative of a sound type or as a device to iṅdicate derivation, we cannot do both (cf. Paul-Schmitt, § 6, Anmerkung 1, where it is decided to use ‘ë’ to indicate an open e-sound, regardless of its origin); cf. footnote 7, above.
- Braune-Mitzka, § 26, § 221, Anmerkung, 2; Penzl, p. 227.
- Braune-Mitzka, § 26, § 221, Anmerkung 2, § 248, Anmerkung 6; von Bahder, pp. 106–137.
- On Pike's concept of “under-differentiated phonemic contrast,” see K. L. Pike, Phonemics, p. 141.
- Cf. Paul Schmitt, § 6, Anmerkung 2.
- Von Bahder, 106 fr.
- According to von Bahder, we find the following in the Vorauer ms. of the Kaiserchronik: fräuele, mägede, mänige, äuerte, männiclich, łägeliche, uälerlichen, älliu. I cannot agree with those who would consider all the ä's in these forms to be analogical. It should be noted that an allophone [ä] of the a-phoneme already existed in the case of the umlaut-hindering consonants (cf. above, footnote 2). Thus the reintroduction of /a/ before i-sounds did not bring a new feature into the language.
- Cf. Streitberg, Michels, and Jellinek, p. 385 f.
- Twaddell, “A Note on OHG Umlaut”, especially p. 180 f.; Penzl, op. cit.
- Cf. Twaddell, 178 ft.
- Cf. Streitberg, Michels, and Jellinek, p. 385 f., and the authorities cited there.
- Choose new content alerts to be informed about new research of interest to you
- Easy remote access to your institution's subscriptions on any device, from any location
- Save your searches and schedule alerts to send you new results
- Export your search results into a .csv file to support your research