Thank you very much David for acquiring the advice of the expert. Somehow I imagined that someone on our list would be able to help in some way. You know a man who can which is worth a tremendous amount. As for understanding the reply - I think it's sunk in, more or less. I am only left with one question and it is this. Why are these names so prolific in one particular part of France? Why not in the north or the east for instance? What was/is different about the south west? Presumably the names predate the ownership by the English of the Aquitaine? Is it possible to ask your friend again about this or have we presumed too much upon his time and/or his summer vacation? Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Pott" <davpott@hotmail.com> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 12:14 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] Re: Ac > Listers, > I could see that the 'old English' that this thread was getting into was > beyond the ken of most of us so I enlisted the brains of one of our leading > place name etymologists. > Below are his thoughts. > > David Pott > > > Firstly, thank you (I think!) for forwarding the rather confused OEL thread. > I'm not sure quite how to unpick it, but here goes... > > There is no question of a connection between -ac and wic. > > (1) Regarding the former, Ian Buckley and his French correspondent seem to > me to have answered the question admirably and concisely, and we may > disregard the wilder speculations. We are dealing with an originally > adjectival suffix used to form place-names and river-names. The form in > British (i.e. the common Brittonic stage of Celtic language) is -ako- (with > a long a). As noted by Dr Buckley, a reflex of this appears in Welsh as -og. > It is there too in Cornish -ek. To the Continental examples already > mentioned could be added numerous place-names in Britian, such as York > (probably 'yew-tree place'), the first part of Berkshire ('hilly place'), > Cam Beck [river in Cumberland] and Cammock [hill in West Yorkshire] (both > 'crooked one'). For several useful references to fuller discussions see > Coates & Breeze (2000) 'Celtic Voices, English Places', p.354 s.v. -og. > > (2) As for the latter, Old English wic is of course a borrowing from Latin > vicus (both with long i), the key sense in both languages being 'specialized > area/settlement': in its earliest applications the Old English word appears > generally to be used in the sense 'trading post'. Other types of > specialization are perhaps discernable at various stages of the word's long > history, but I rather suspect that an element of trade underlies them all. > The notion that all the place-names in England which have hitherto be > explained as containing wic are actually reformations of earlier names > in -ako- is far-fetched. We have ample early documentation which absolutely > precludes this. Such a development is not in itself impossible or even > implausible, at least in an individual case or two (indeed the development > of York from Ebur(o)-ako- via a pseudo-Old English form Eoforwic > demonstrates precisely this reanalysis), but cannot be taken as feasible > across the board. It could never account for wic as a first element in > compounds such as Wickham, or as a simplex name Wick, nor could it account > for the palatal form of names like Sandwich, Fordwich, and Harwich. > > Hope that was more of a help than a hindrance, > All the best > Paul > > > Dr Paul Cullen > Institute for Name-Studies > School of English Studies > University of Nottingham > > > > > Nevertheless, one can entertain the possibility that every -wick name in > > England was once a -ck place-name indicator, in the time before the Latin > > renaming of such places. It is at least reasonable to propose that the > > Latin word was a variant of another Indo-European word carrying the same > > meaning. (And if not a variant of a such a word, what was the origin of > the > > Latin?) Also, what word or suffix did the British or Irish Celts use as a > > place-indicator? > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > To contact the list administrator: > OLD-ENGLISH-admin@rootsweb.com > >

... Why are these names so prolific in one particular part of France? Why not in the north or the east for instance? What was/is different about the south west? You have to bear in mind that there was no unified Celtic language spoken throughout what we now call France. We do better to think of a constellation of dialects with as many local differences as now exist between Welsh and Cornish and Breton, or between Irish, Scots Gaelic and Manx. IB

Thanks Ian. I don't really know anything about the Celts. Am I right in saying that they weren't the original inhabitants of the British Isles? Do you know when they came and how they spread throughout and where they originated? Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Buckley" <Ianbuckley@uko2.co.uk> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 11:22 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] Re: Ac > ... Why are these names so prolific > in one particular part of France? Why not in the north or the east for > instance? What was/is different about the south west? > > You have to bear in mind that there was no unified Celtic language spoken > throughout what we now call France. We do better to think of a constellation > of dialects with as many local differences as now exist between Welsh and > Cornish and Breton, or between Irish, Scots Gaelic and Manx. > IB > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > OLD-ENGLISH Web Page > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > >