to h Anglo-Saxon.[1] Maetzner tells us that the aspirated ch was completely foreign to Anglo-Saxon before the eleventh century,[2] and he quotes the words cild, cêce, ceafor, ceósan, for the later English words child, cheek, chafer, and choose, as examples. These authorities will probably be held to be sufficient on this point. In dealing with the evidence of place-names in the Upper Thames valley which possibly may refer to the Hocings or Chaucians, there remains to be considered briefly the use of the aspirated h, or its omission. The Anglo-Saxon language was marked by the use of the aspirate, but there are examples which show its omission. Skeat attributes the modern English misuse of the h sound to French influence after the Norman Conquest, the French h being certainly weaker than the English, and hardly sounded.[3] He admits, however, that a few sporadic examples may be found in Anglo-Saxon.[4] He gives as an example ors for hors (horse), found in an unedited Anglo-Saxon manuscript. The following also appear to be examples of its omission or misuse: ymen, ymn, for hymn;[5] Ybernia for Hibernia;[6] Wulfhora and Wulfora[7] and Ockemere for Hokemere.[8] There are other examples, such as Elig and Helig for Ely. The misuse of the h among the Anglo-Saxons may have been due partly to Wendish influence or that of settlers from other Baltic lands. The pastor Mithof tells us that a peculiarity of the Wends in his day was that whenever they spoke German they were in the habit of putting an h before words in which it did not exist, and leaving it out where it did.[9] Morfill says that the same
- ↑ Latham, R. G., loc. cit., p. 93.
- ↑ Maetzner, E., ‘English Grammar,’ i. 151.
- ↑ Skeat, W. W., ‘Principles of English Etymology,’ 359, 360.
- ↑ Notes and Queries, Seventh Series, vi. 110.
- ↑ Bosworth, J., Anglo-Saxon and English Dictionary.
- ↑ Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, edited by Thorpe.
- ↑ Codex Dipl., 1093 and 1164.
- ↑ Cartulary of St. Frideswide, edited by Wigram, i., p. 4.
- ↑ Morfill, W. R., ‘The Polabes,’ Transactions Philolog. Soc., 1880-1881, p. 85.
