ɸϡŪäƹͤƤɬפΤǤ롥رμȤˤƴϢŸΤǡDzƸƤƤ
ǯѸ˸ˤƥѥѤ뤳ȤϡμˡȤʤäƤ롥ѸۤɤǤϤʤαѸˤƤ⤽ʤεϤΥƥȥǡ˥Ǥ褦ˤʤäȤǡθ츽ݤҴŪŪʬϤ뤳ȤǽȤʤꡤ¿βŪθ⤿餵Ƥ롥
ѥ˴ŤѸ˸δϡ´߽ФƤ⤤롥ϡǡΤʤʤȤ˥ѥϡ¸줿ƥȤ鹽롥ϡűѸ줫ѸФƽѸޤǤθϡդǤĤƤʤȤŪʾ塤פΤʤȤǤϤ롥˱ѸȾϡ§ȤäդǤϤʤդξͿƤʤΤ
ϡŤѸŪܤƤФۤɡ˺䤹ΤǤ⤢롥˥ѥˤϡαѸΤʤդظˤȲꤵäդޤѸƤ뤫Τ褦ʺФ˴٤䤹ΤºݤˤϡѥΤʤˤϡäդϡʤȤľŪˤϼƤʤˤ⤫餺ƱͤˡդդˤθѤ䡤ҲŪ˼ﲽ줿͡θ⡤ѥ˴ޤޤƤʤȤ¿ѥѤƤ⡤ʤä쥸αѸˤˤϥǤʤΤѥѤѸ˸ԤϡʤäΤˤ뤳ȤƤνռƤɬפ롥
Τ褦˵Τϡѥθ³ͥƥ˻Ŧƽ뤿ǤϤʤषѥ䴰¾λĤȤνĴ뤿Ǥ롥 ŪܡʸŪμҲŪطʤʤɤȤ߹碌뤳ȤǡѥǡǤϸƤʤˤ˸Ƥ褦Ȥ뤳ȤפǤ롥
Ϣơʲε⻲ȡ
#307. ѥѤ ([2010-02-28-1])
#367. ѥѤ (2) ([2010-04-29-1])
#428. The Brown family of corpora Ѿա ([2010-06-29-1])
#1280. ѥɽ ([2012-10-28-1])
#2584. ˱Ѹ쥳ѥɽ ([2016-05-24-1])
#2779. ѥϱѸ˸˻Ȥ뤱ɤ ([2016-12-05-1])
#3967. ѥѤ (3) ([2020-03-07-1])
#4915. ѸˤΥǥ --- رΥǥ롦ҥ塼ޥ˥ƥֵ ([2022-10-11-1])
#4916. ǥѤθˤĤƵޤ ([2022-10-12-1])
#5280. ǯ٤رȥǥѤθˤĤƵޤ ([2023-10-11-1])

#5647. ػˡա١ʳҥɡƱ˼ҡ2019ǯˡ ([2025-01-20-1]) ӡ#5650. إӥͥե졼ա١ʳҥɡƱ˼ҡ2018ǯˡ ([2025-01-23-1]) ˰³ȯˡ˴ؤҤҲ𤹤롥
ڤʸ˥68170Ρ֥ǥȯۤΩĥե졼ʸǥ롦ȤäͤȤߡˡ (p. 4) äͤޤƤ롥ʲܼ

3ε#5647. ػˡա١ʳҥɡƱ˼ҡ2019ǯˡ ([2025-01-20-1]) ˰³ΤλˡȤƤΩĥӥͥե졼ܤҲ𤷤褦ƱǸ¤Ϻ夲ҤΤۤ1ǯǤƤ롥ܼΤޤޥե졼̾ˤʤäƤ롥

ϸԤǤꡤӥͥޥǤбļԤǤʤΤӥͥϤλˡե졼ܤǤ롥Ʊꡤˡǥȯȼ«λʤɡˤ⻲ͤˤʤ뤳Ȥ¿
ɤ櫓ΤλˡΤ褦ʽҤϤޤФƤʤԤϡؽѸμˡͭ¸ĤΥե졼˲ΤΤ⤷ʤȤȡʬϡषӥͥϤνҤɬפΤ
ͤƤߤС衤̣Ǥ rhetoric logic ȤȤŪư濴ʤƤϸˤӥͥˤ뤷ˤäˤäΩIJǽ⤤λˡե졼ϡθǤȤäƤ褤ΤǤϤʤ
ܤϤȤ뤬ػˡա١ʳҥɡƱ˼ҡ2019ǯʲܼ뤬Τޤ͡ʻˡΰȤʤäƤ뤳Ȥʬ
Voicy heldio ˤ#1212. رѸ츻ŵ٤Ρָ츻ز --- ֱѸ˥饤2024פۿޤϡ98 heldio ΤȤƳŤ줿ֱѸ˥饤2024θ9ۿ줿ɲΥǤǤҤǤƤرѸ츻ŵδŪʲʸɤʤɤƤȤݤɽǤ¿ΥꥹʡۿǤİޤ꤬Ȥޤ
khelf ƣ蘆ʷرˤ MC ̳ᡤֱѸ츻ŵɥΡȡΤ lacolaco ޤˤȿĿФäꡤ45ʬ֤νɲΩޤ˥åʴǤǻȤʤäƤޤرѸ츻ŵ٤Υեʤ餺ȤڤۿȻפޤҤİʲϡоݤȤʤäʸϤκǽ2Ǥ (p. 1647)
1. 츻ؤȤϲ
츻ؤŪϡñβȯ֤ˤỌ̇̄Ѳβǽʤ̤뤳ȤˤäơʸޤʸκǸŤβỌ̇̄ƱޤϿꤷθθȿˤ뤽θΰ֤̻Ū˷ꤹ뤳Ȥˤ롥äơ츻ؤϥեΰʬʤ뤤ϸ°뤬ˡȼȤˤơˡӸؤ̩ܤ˴ϢޤŪ;ڤųؤ̤Ѥ롥
ѸξǤСѸ줫Ѹ (Middle English: ά ME)ŴѸ (Old English: ά OE) ʳˤޤ̤Ū츻Ūȡ˱ѸΩ̤äƥޥ (proto-Germanic: ά Gmc) (Proto-Indo-European: ά IE) ʳ̸Ū츻Ȥͤ롥ñθ츻ꤹ뤿ˤϡξ̤̤ơ֤Ϣ³Ʊ˰̣Ϣ³ǧʤФʤʤơѸȤ줬ΩθŪͻѸΩ̸ŪͻԤ٤ȡʤѸŪ椬ӸŪԤ٤ȤϤޤǤʤǤ
嵭ۿơδۤǤ2ϡ¤ϤʤȻפޤ2Ŧޤ1Ĥˡָ츻ؤŪϡάͤθθȿˤ뤽θΰ֤̻Ū˷ꤹ뤳ȤˤפʤǤɼԤϾʤΤǤϤʤǤ礦伫Ȥ⤳ʸλ̤Ρְ̣פȤƤ⡤줬ɤΤ褦ʡְյפĤΤˤϾλ֤פޤäƤΤɤ⿴ʤȤǤ
2ĤϡǸʬֱѸȤ줬ΩθŪͻѸΩ̸ŪͻԤ٤ȡʤѸŪ椬ӸŪԤ٤ȤϤޤǤʤǤפǤβսˤĤƤϡˤޤǤʤۤɼʤΤȤ䤬ޤȤΤϡŪˤߤ¤ꡤŪͻ̸ŪͻʤǤʤΤˡֱѸŪ椬ӸŪԤ٤פȤΤϡष̷⤷Ƥ褦ʹʤǤ礦2ܤˤĤƤϡθɤСΤ˿դ狼äƤޤˤ衤ʤʤοι⤤ǽ2ǤϤʤǤ礦
1ܤˤĤƻϹͤȤΤǤơָ츻ؤŪϡάͤθθȿˤ뤽θΰ֤̻Ū˷ꤹ뤳ȤˤפβͤƤФȻפޤ
츻ؤȤϲȤ䤤ˤĤƤϡhellog ʲεȡ
#466. 츻ؤϵݤʳؤ ([2010-08-06-1])
#727. 츻ؤμΧ ([2011-04-24-1])
#1791. 츻ؤϵݤʳؤ (2) ([2014-03-23-1])
#598. Ѹ츻ؤά (1) ([2010-12-16-1])
#599. Ѹ츻ؤά (2) ([2010-12-17-1])
ޤǤΤȤرѸ츻ŵ˴ؿäϡꤷƤС

߷ ˧ͺԽ紴ˡرѸ츻ŵٿǡҡ2024ǯ
Voicy heldio ˤ#1205. Baugh and Cable 57ɼ¶ --- ֱѸ˥饤2024פۿޤϡ#5607. ֱѸ˥饤2024פ B&C 57 "Chronological Criteria" ɼ¶Ѥޤ ([2024-09-02-1]) ͽ𤷤Ȥꡤ98ˤ˳Ť줿ֱѸ˥饤2024פīȤˤۿ줿ȤȤˤʤäƤޤ
ʳءˤᥤMC̳ᡤϽؤʾءˤȻ䤬äǤɼ¶ѤǤإᥤȡhelwa ꥹʡˤ khelf С̾ȤƼϿ˵碌ۿǤİˤʤäꥹʡΤ81̾ãޤؤ֤Ǥī夲Ƥꡤ꤬Ȥޤ
夲ϡ¤ϥƥ˥ǤűѸΥƥѸˤĤơ줾ñ줬ƱǤ⤤ļڤ줿ΤмѤǯ¬˴ؤˡȤʤäƤޤ夲ƤƥѸϤ֤ŪǤϤޤѲӸؤμˡ˸ƤŪƤȤʤäƤޤ
ɲˤäƤǫ˱ʸɤ߲ƤСɬǤޤ˸ظΥƥ¦̤θ뤳ȤǤǤ礦48ʬۤɤĹܤǤҤ֤ΤȤˤäꤪİ
Baugh and Cable ɥΥХåʥСϡ#5291. heldio ΡֱѸˤθŵŪ̾ Baugh and Cable ɤץĴ˿ʤǤޤ ([2023-10-22-1]) ˷ǺܤƤޤҤε˥ƥȤꤷơ1ᤫ餪İС

Baugh, Albert C. and Thomas Cable. A History of the English Language. 6th ed. London: Routledge, 2013.

Baugh and Cable ˤѸˤθŵŪ̾ Voicy heldio ˤ1᤺ɤƤäȿʤƤޤǯ7˳ϤͭǤޤɲʤɤǤ̾ heldio ˤ̵Ƥޤ
98ˤ12 heldio ۿδֱѸ˥饤2024פŤޤī 8:00-- 8:55 55ʬȤǡBaugh and Cable 57ɼ¶ѡפ̵ͽǤʳءˤϽؤʾءˤī3ͤ䤫ɲ깭Ƥޤ
ƥȤǤʤΤˡɤ뤳ȤˤʤäƤ57 "Chronological Criteria" (pp. 73--75) αʸʲ˷ǺܤƤޤűѸΥƥѸǯ¬˴ؤ륨ƥʲսǤäͽƤƤޤȡɼ¶ѤڤİȤǤȻפޤ
57. Chronological Criteria.In order to form an accurate idea of the share that each of these three periods had in extending the resources of the English vocabulary, it is first necessary to determine as closely as possible the date at which each of the borrowed words entered the language. This is naturally somewhat difficult to do, and in the case of some words it is impossible. But in a large number of cases it is possible to assign a word to a given period with a high degree of probability and often with certainty. It will be instructive to pause for a moment to inquire how this is done.
The evidence that can be employed is of various kinds and naturally of varying value. Most obvious is the appearance of the word in literature. If a given word occurs with fair frequency in texts such as Beowulf, or the poems of Cynewulf, such occurrence indicates that the word has had time to pass into current use and that it came into English not later than the early part of the period of Christian influence. But it does not tell us how much earlier it was known in the language, because the earliest written records in English do not go back beyond the year 700. Moreover, the late appearance of a word in literature is no proof of late adoption. The word may not be the kind of word that would naturally occur very often in literary texts, and so much of Old English literature has been lost that it would be very unsafe to argue about the existence of a word on the basis of existing remains. Some words that are not found recorded before the tenth century (e.g., pīpe 'pipe', cīese 'cheese') can be assigned confidently on other grounds to the period of continental borrowing.
The character of the word sometimes gives some clue to its date. Some words are obviously learned and point to a time when the church had become well established in the island. On the other hand, the early occurrence of a word in several of the Germanic dialects points to the general circulation of the word in the Germanic territory and its probable adoption by the ancestors of the English on the continent. Testimony of this kind must of course be used with discrimination. A number of words found in Old English and in Old High German, for example, can hardly have been borrowed by either language before the Anglo-Saxons migrated to England but are due to later independent adoption under conditions more or less parallel, brought about by the introduction of Christianity into the two areas. But it can hardly be doubted that a word like copper, which is rare in Old English, was nevertheless borrowed on the continent when we find it in no fewer than six Germanic languages.
The most conclusive evidence of the date at which a word was borrowed, however, is to be found in the phonetic form of the word. The changes that take place in the sounds of a language can often be dated with some definiteness, and the presence or absence of these changes in a borrowed word constitutes an important test of age. A full account of these changes would carry us far beyond the scope of this book, but one or two examples may serve to illustrate the principle. Thus there occurred in Old English, as in most of the Germanic languages, a change known as i-umlaut. (Umlaut is a German word meaning 'alteration of sound', which in English is sometimes called mutation.) This change affected certain accented vowels and diphthongs (æ, ā, ō, ū, ēa, ēo , and īo) when they were followed in the next syllable by an ī or j. Under such circumstances, æ and a became e, and ō became ē, ā became ǣ, and ū became ȳ. The diphthongs ēa, ēo, īo became īe, later ī, ȳ. Thus *baŋkiz > benc (bench), *mūsiz > mȳs, plural of mūs (mouse), and so forth. The change occurred in English in the course of the seventh century, and when we find it taking place ina word borrowed from Latin, it indicates that the Latin word had been taken into English by that time. Thus Latin monēta (which became *munit in Prehistoric OE) > mynet (a coin, Mod. E. mint) and is an early borrowing. Another change (even earlier) that helps us to date a borrowed word is that known as palatal diphthongization. By this sound change ǣ or ē in early Old English was changed to a diphthong (ēa and īe, respectively) when preceded by certain palatal consonants (ċ, ġ, sc). OE cīese (L. cāseus, chesse) mentioned earlier, shows both i-umlaut and palatal diphthongization (cāseus > *ċǣsi > *ċēasi > *ċīese). In many words, evidence for date is furnished by the sound changes of Vulgar Latin. Thus, for example, an intervocalic p (and p in the combination pr) in the Late Latin of northern Gaul (seventh century) was modified to a sound approximating a v, and the fact that L. cuprum, coprum (copper) appears in OE as copor with the p unchanged indicates a period of borrowing prior to this change (cf. F. cuivre). Again Latin ī changed to e before A.D. 400 so that words like OE biscop (L. episcopus), disc (L. discus), sigel 'brooch' (L. sigillum), and the like, which do not show this change, were borrowed by the English on the continent. But enough has been said to indicate the method and to show that the distribution of the Latin words in Old English among the various periods at which borrowing took place rests not upon guesses, however shrewd, but upon definite facts and upon fairly reliable phonetic inferences.
Baugh and Cable ɥΥХåʥСϡ#5291. heldio ΡֱѸˤθŵŪ̾ Baugh and Cable ɤץĴ˿ʤǤޤ ([2023-10-22-1]) ˷ǺܤƤޤҤε˥ƥȤꤷơ1ᤫ餪İС
Baugh, Albert C. and Thomas Cable. A History of the English Language. 6th ed. London: Routledge, 2013.

#5601. ܸʸΰۤʤ ([2024-08-27-1]) εǡѤƴʸͤΤʤǡִפȤѸ줬äо줷ܸˤǡ֤פѸǤ공ǰȳؤ䤿ŪˡִϸפȤƤȤ館Ƥ롤ŵŪˤϴ2ۤɤʤɽΤȤǤ롥
ϡִפȤƶƳˤäơȤơʿפƤ롥̤˹ͤСϡ֥إᥤפȲɤߤɤ߲ϸäǤ롥12ȾФȤǹͤȡδ2ʸʤִפϡɤߤΡ֥إᥤפΤߤʤ餺ɤߤǡ֥ۥΡפȤɤ߲ȤǤ줬¿ȤƤʸǤϡ֥إᥤפɤ߲ǽ⤯¸줬¿ȤƤʸǤϡ֥ۥΡפβǽ⤫äˤʤ2ʸϢʤϡŪˤ1ĤɤߤޤʤäΤǤꡤˤˡʤäȤΤ
ơδ2ʸΰ֤Ȥʤ롥δ2ʸƷŪˡִפȸƤǤɤΤ褦ɤ߲̤Ȥơɤ߲η˸ڤˡ̵̣ʡִפθƾΤϰճǤ롥ɤ߲η̤ˤ餺ȤѸ졦ǰ
ޤ褿Ȥǡ (44--45) Ƴ褦äȤѸ졦ǰͭפʬ
Ȥˤ⤫ˤ⡤ѻ褦ȤƤΤˡߤƤʤ路Ƥ뤫狼ʤȤܸˤƤϵ롥Ȥˤ뤳Ȥ褦ȤˤʤȤ夭뤤ˤ夭Τ뤵Τˤ餫Ǥä뤿ˡʤ路Ƥ뤫狼ʤΤˡִפȤ̾ĤƤ줬ʤ路Ƥ뤫Ƚ顤¸ȤȤϤäȤƤФ褤ޤĶñ̤ǤäƤ⡤¤ǤΤϤ٤ơִפȸƤ֡
Τ褦ˡִפȤǰꤷƤȤܸˤδѻʬϡҤͭǤȹͤ롥뤤ͭǤ뤳ȤĶơִפܸˤˤȤäƤΥɤΰĤ⤷ʤĤޤꡤִפȤǰȤäȡޤǤ뤳Ȥ¿ΤܸȤȤˤʤ롥ΤȤǤ뤬ʸ˴ȤäƤʤˤĤƹͤˤäƤϡִפȤǰɬפʤɽʸΤߤȤδѻˤ¸ߤʤǰȤäƤ褤
ʸˤȤäơƼ٤ƶǤϤʤ
ܸȴ --- ˡʤդˡ١ȽŹҴȿӡ2024ǯ
Ѹˤϡ§Ȥ괧 the դΤʤޤֻ of ޤ̾ۤȤɤʤǡ¾ΤĤΥ衼åѽȤϰۤʤä
ˤ֤ȡѸˤϡ̾ʤɤΰ̾ͳ褹ϰ̾ȤѤƤ괧줬դ⳧̵ǤϤʤäof ʤɤֻդ̾ʤɤ̤ˤäѸϡФХեδѤ˽äȤ⤢ꡤ̤ۤʿƤ櫓ǤʤäΤ
ȤѸפȾˤơϰ躹⤢褦괧ֻ줬ڤȤ褦ˤʤäƤȤFransson (25) ɤǤߤ褦
Surnames of occupation and nicknames are usually preceded by the definite article, le (masc.) or la (fem.); the two forms are regularly kept apart in the earlier rolls, but in the 15th century they are often confused. Those names in this book that are preceded by the have all been taken from rolls translated into English, and the has been inserted by the editor instead of le or la. The case is that the hardly ever occurs in the manuscripts; cf the following instances, which show the custom in reality: Rose the regratere 1377 (Langland: Piers Plowman 226). Lucia ye Aukereswoman 1275 1.RH 413 (L. la Aukereswomman ib. 426).
Sometimes de occurs instead of le; this is due to an error made either by the scribe or the editor. The case is that de has an extensive use in local surnames, e.g. Thom. de Selby. Other prepositions (in, atte, of etc.) are not so common, especially not in early rolls.
The article, however, is often left out; this is rare in the 12th and 13th centuries, but becomes common in the middle of the 14th century. There is an obvious difference between different parts of England: in the South the article precedes the surname almost regularly during the present period, while in the North it is very often omitted. The final disappearance of le takes place in the latter half of the 14th century; in most counties one rarely finds it after c1375, but in some cases, e.g. in Lancashire, le occurs fairly often as late as c1400. De is often retained some 50 years longer than le: in York it disappears in the early 15th century, in Lancashire it sometimes occurs c1450, while in the South it is regularly dropped at the end of the 14th century.
ŪʲǤʤ괧ֻ줬ڤȤ뤳ȤˤʤäΤˤϿƤʤƤ٤Ѥʵ䤬1̾ˤֻˤĤƤϡ#2366. ʤѸ̾νϡ̾פʤΤ ([2015-10-19-1]) Ǿ줿Ȥ롥⻲Ȥ줿
Fransson, G. Middle English Surnames of Occupation 1100--1350, with an Excursus on Toponymical Surnames. Lund Studies in English 3. Lund: Gleerup, 1935.
ε#5473. Ѹˤ뿦Ȥɽ魯 by-name μ갷 (2) --- ƥδġ ([2024-04-21-1]) ³ϱѸ by-name ФեδĤˤĤơFransson (24--25) Ѥ롥
Besides in English, surnames also occur very frequently in French; I have made a calculation and found that one third of the surnames of occupation treated in this book is of French origin. The reason for this is to be found in the predominating position that the French language had during this period. French was spoken by all educated people, and English by the lower classes. Those who spoke French had, of course, surnames in French, and probably also used the French forms of English names when speaking with each other. It is possible, too, that those people who spoke English were influenced by this and used the French forms of their names, which, of course, were finer. During this period a large number of French names came into the language, and a great many of these have survived to the present day, whereas the corresponding substantives have often died out.
There is also another reason, however, for the frequent occurrence of French names; the case is that the scribe often translated English names into French, especially in early rolls. These translations, which are most common in assize rolls, are principally due to the fact that the court proceedings were generally held in French. I have found some instances in which both the English and French forms occur of the same person's surname, e.g.: Humfrey le Syur 1270 Ass 144, H. le Sawyere ib. 139 (So). --- Ric. le Charpentir 1327 SR 211, R. le Wryth 1332 SR 96 (St).
Υɿͤ̾˴ŤΤǤꡤĤ줬ե˸츻ñä硤μ갷ϾʤȤ3ढ롥
(1) ñȤƼƤ餺ΥեñλǤ
(2) ñȤƼƤ뤬ǤϥեñλǤ
(3) ñȤƼƤꡤǤϱñλǤ
(1) ǤȳοäƽҤ٤뤿ˤϡαѸʸΤɤõƤ⡤ñȤƼޤƤפʤȤɬפ롥ĴˤäƱñȤƼޤƤפ1Ǥ⸫ĤСοɤ餰Ȥˤʤ
(2) (3) ΥǤϡñȤƼƤ뤳ȤϳǧǤȤƤ⡤սˤ뤽ñ줬եñȤƻѤƤΤ뤤ϱñȤƻѤƤΤȽ̤ΤȤΤϡθϥեθեͳ褹Ǥꡤˤ褭ƻƤ뤫Ǥ롥
̾˸¤餺ˡΧȽǶ˴ؤŪʸΤʤ˸եñ餷ΤˤĤƤϡˤ꤬뤳ȤդƤܤˤƤñϡեñʤΤ뤤ϥեͳ褹ñʤΤ뤤ϡξǤȤ⤢ΤǺޤǤ롥
Fransson, G. Middle English Surnames of Occupation 1100--1350, with an Excursus on Toponymical Surnames. Lund Studies in English 3. Lund: Gleerup, 1935.
#5470. Ѹˤ뿦Ȥɽ魯 by-name μ갷 ([2024-04-18-1]) ǡѸ by-name μ갷ϡƥե줫δĤˤ뤳ȤҲ𤷤ϥƥȤδؤˤĤơFransson (23--24) Ѥƻ⤷
The medieval rolls were written in Latin, and Christian names and surnames were also, when practicable, often translated into Latin. This was especially the case in the early Middle Ages (12--13th cent.), and surnames in English are therefore rarely met with so early. The surnames that appear in Latin are chiefly those names that are in common use, e.g. Carpentarius, Cissor, Cocus, Faber, Fullo, Marescallus, Medicus, Mercator, Molendinarius, Pelliparius, Pistor, Sutor, Tannator, Textor, Tinetor. The surnames, however, that were rare and difficult to translate, e.g. Wirdragher, Chesewright, Heyberare, Geldehirde, generally occur in English, even in early rolls.
In the 14th century these translations gradually pass out of use, and the native or French form becomes predominant. Thus, for instance, there is a considerable difference between SR [= Lay Subsidy Rolls] 1275 and SR 1327 (Wo); in the former there are a large number of names in Latin, but in the latter there are hardly any translations at all.
There surnames in Latin seem to have had some influence on the later development; the case is that some of them still exist as surnames, e.g. Faber, Pistor, Sutor.
ѸθŪ̾ʤɤϥƥǽ뤳Ȥ¿äˡϱѸθȤƤФХƥ줿ǵܤƤȤʣʻ𤬤롥ѸȤƤΤꤿΤ褦ʸԤˤȤäƤϡʤ虜虜ƥƤƤޤäƤΤȼ¤˻椤ޤƥǤʤȤˤΤߡ褯Ѹ߽̾ФƤɽ̲Ƥ롤ȤʤΤ
줬14ʹߡѸȡƥȤϱƤᡤظ˱ƤαѸ̾夷ƤΤΤ褦ʸԤˤȤäƤϡ˥˥䤻ʤȤʤ롥
¿ΤϤޤᤤƥδĤȤϲ褷ƤΤΡѸˤϤäȤ䤳եδĤȤ̤꤬ΤƬˤˤĤƤεǡ
Fransson, G. Middle English Surnames of Occupation 1100--1350, with an Excursus on Toponymical Surnames. Lund Studies in English 3. Lund: Gleerup, 1935.
#5452. Ѹ̾ˤˤ by-name family name ΰ㤤 ([2024-03-31-1]) ʤɤǼ夲ƤѸ̾ by-name ˸ˤĤơѸ by-name դ봷ȯãƤȤŵŪ̾դΥѥ1Ĥ̾ (occupational terms) ѤΤä̤θϡԤƤϤʤΤΡʤθѤ롥Clark (294--95) ϡ٥ˤ by-name ĴʸΤʤǡʸڤ줿 by-name βˤޤĤ˿Ƥ롥ڵΤޤ뤳ȤɬǤʤͳ¿Ȥ
The simplest of these Canterbury surnames offer supplementary records, mainly antedatings, of straightforward occupational terms. Yet all is not wholly straightforward. To begin with, we cannot be sure whether the occupational terms used in administrative documents were in fact all current as surnames, that is, in daily use among neighbours, or whether some were supplied by the scribes as formal specifiers, just as occupations and addresses are in legal documents of the present day. Nor can we be sure in what form neighbours would have used such terms as they did. With those examples that are latinized --- a proportion varying in the present material from three-quarters to nine-tenths --- scribal intervention is patent, although sometimes reconstruction of the vernacular base seems easy (such forms, and other speculative cases, are cited in square brackets). With those given in a French form matters are more complex. On the one hand, scribes had a general bias away from English and towards French, as though the latter were, as has been said, 'a sort of ignoble substitute for Latin'; therefore, use of a French occupational term guarantees neither its currency in the English speech of the time nor, alternatively, any currency of French outside the scriptorium: in so far as such terms appear neither in literary sources nor as modern surnames MED is justified in excluding them. On the other hand, many 'French' terms were adopted into English very early; use of these would by no means imply currency of French as such, either in the community at large or in the scriptorium itself.
ڵǤطʤ¿ͤȤ櫓ƥե줬ؤäƤǤ롥λǶ̾ʤɤ˵Ƥ̾ϥƥ첽ƤΤ¿Ѹ̾Ϥα˱ƤޤäƤ롥ޤեǽƤ뤳Ȥ¿ο̾ΤΤեͳξ硤줬Ǥ˱ѸƱƤñʤΤȤեñΤޤޤʤΤȽǤ
Ȥɽ魯 by-name ϡ⤽ʸŪ˰ˤǺʤΤǤ롥ơϿȤɽ魯 by-name ˸¤餺Ѹθ̤ͭ̾˴ؤʻǤ⤢롥
Clark, Cecily. "Some Early Canterbury Surnames." English Studies 57.4 (1976): 204--309.
ǯβƤΩ夲̾ץȡ (name_project) ΰĤȤơ̾ (onomastic) ʸɤൡ¿ʤäƤ롥 hellog Ǥ⡤Clark ȤƸűѸ̾ؤ˴ؤϤƤ
Clark ʸκǸǤ롥Ѹ̾ؤ椷褦Ȼפä顤μȳи礬롤ȤΤȡʡḷȡˤߤƤΤäޤɤǤƱѸ̾ؤؤδؿʲĤ줿ɼԤκǸΤܤˤơ֤䡼פȤʤʤȡ餬ҥҥ䤹ۤɤǤ롥
Because lack of context makes name-etymology especially speculative, any opinion proffered in a survey or a name-dictionary must be considered critically, as basis for further investigation rather than as definitive statement. Anyone wishing to pursue historical name-studies of either sort seriously must, in addition to becoming conversant with the philology of the relevant medieval languages, be able to read Medieval Latin as well as modern French and German. Assessing and interpreting the administrative records that form the main course-material is the essential first step in any onomastic study, and requires understanding of palaeographical and diplomatic techniques; competence in numismatics may on occasion also be needed. Onomastic analysis itself involves not only political, social and cultural history but also, when place-names are concerned, a grasp of cartography, geology, archaeology and agrarian development. Any student suitably trained and equipped will find great scope for making original contributions to this field of study.
ΥѡޥǤʤȱѸ̾ؤθ̳ޤʤ
Clark, Cecily. "Onomastics." The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 1. Ed. Richard M. Hogg. Cambridge: CUP, 1992. 452--89.
ǯ˰١ʸϸΤΥǥΰˤĤرȵ뵡ޤǯ٤εηаޤϡʲε𤷤ޤ
#4915. ѸˤΥǥ --- رΥǥ롦ҥ塼ޥ˥ƥֵ ([2022-10-11-1])
#4916. ǥѤθˤĤƵޤ ([2022-10-12-1])
ǯ٤Ʊݤǵ뵡ޤüԤرϺǯ٤ȤϰۤʤСǡ줾ʸϤ͡ʬ˽°Ƥޤޤ伫ȤѸˤ칶Ƥ뤳Ȥ⤢ѸʬˤǥѤȤβˤĤƳפäޤξǡرˡȤʬ˰ĤƥǥˡˤĤƸܤߤƤ餤θվǵƤ餤ޤ⤷ФƤޤΤǡʲܥ֥ɼԤγȶͭȻפޤ

ضѸˤʸˡŪʸŪѲ6˳ҤǤƤޤ15--20αʸˡӤѲ¾Ū˵ҤƤޤܽΥˡϡ6̾θԤγơθ¬ŪĴƤ뤳ȤǤġξϤɤΤ褤ǤܤܤƾϤޤɤΤ褤Ȼפޤ
ܽˤĤƤϡܥ֥Voicy heldioYouTube ͡ˤҲ𤷤Ƥޤ heldio ǤüʰءȤ̲2#831. ضѸˤʸˡŪʸŪѲ --- üȤ (2)ۿޤϡѸθѲ椹ݤǺߡ̥ϤʤɤܤǽŪˤϸˡᤰ̵ȯŸޤ35ʬۤɤβȤʤޤ֤ΤȤˤɤ
βäơܽҲ𥷥ФäȤˤʤޤƤޤǤδϢƥĤؤΥĥäƤޤԤİĤܽɤǤȤΤ⡤Ḥ̂襤Ȼפޤ
YouTube ְʼδѸظإͥפ#137. ʸˡ18λȳ̿ٹ뤬طʤ---λܻҤʱѸ졦Ѹ˸ԡˤ---
hellog #5166. ¼ԡˡضѸˤʸˡŪʸŪѲ١ʳҡ2023ǯˡ ([2023-06-19-1])
hellog #5167. ʤ18˵ʸˡήԤäΤǤ ([2023-06-20-1])
hellog #5182. ʸܤȿС ([2023-07-05-1])
hellog #5186. Voicy heldio ˽¼о --- ضѸˤʸˡŪʸŪѲ٤ˤĤƤäޤ ([2023-07-09-1])
hellog #5208. ս17αʸˡˤĤ̤ޤ ([2023-07-31-1])
hellog #5224. 滳19αʸˡˤĤ̤ޤ ([2023-08-16-1])
hellog #5235. Ҹ15αʸˡˤĤ̤ޤ ([2023-08-27-1])
hellog #5242. ü20αʸˡˤĤ̤ޤ ([2023-09-03-1])
hellog #5249. üȸѸθѲ˸椹뤫ˤĤ̤ޤ ([2023-09-09-1])
heldio #769. ضѸˤʸˡŪʸŪѲ --- ¼Ȥ̡
heldio #772. ضѸˤʸˡŪʸŪѲ --- 16αѸᤰʡȤ̡
heldio #790. ضѸˤʸˡŪʸŪѲ --- սȤ̡
heldio #806. ضѸˤʸˡŪʸŪѲ --- 滳Ȥ̡
heldio #824. ضѸˤʸˡŪʸŪѲ --- üȤ (1)
heldio #831. ضѸˤʸˡŪʸŪѲ --- üȤ (2)
heldio #837. 18αѸʸˡѲ --- ¼Ȥ̡ʢ 2023/09/15(Fri) θ嵭
¼ԡˡҸ סʡ ҡ滳 ü ¼ˡضѸˤʸˡŪʸŪѲ١ҡ2023ǯ
Ϣε#5225. ̾ι (2) ([2023-08-17-1])#5226. ̾̾դطʤˤ2ĤưŤ ([2023-08-18-1]) ǰѡȤƤ Clark (453) ꡤ⤽űѸ̾ (onomastics) θ (source-materials) ˤϤɤΤ褦ʤΤΤǧƤ
The sources for early name-forms, of people and of places alike, are, in terms of the conventional disciplines, ones more often associated with 'History' than with 'English Studies': they range from chronicles through Latinised administrative records to inscriptions, monumental and other. Not only that: the aims and therefore also the findings of name-study are at least as often oriented towards socio-cultural or politico-economic history as towards linguistics. This all goes to emphasise how artificial the conventional distinctions are between the various fields of study.
Thus, onomastic sources for the OE period include: chronicles, Latin and vernacular; libri vitae; inscriptions and coin-legends; charters, wills, writs and other business-records; and above all Domesday Book. Not only each type of source but each individual piece demands separate evaluation.
ŪʸűѸʸŪȤϾۤʤǧ졤̣ȤϤʸŪ椫礭Ƥ櫓ǤʤʸؤǤƤ븶ϤפʤΤѤκǸˤ褦 "each individual piece" βͤõȤⶦ̤롥ͭ̾ϰ̤ñƱ꤬ᡤ;פ˿ŤפȤϤꤽ
ᤰˤĤƤϰʲεȡ
#1264. ˸ؤθ³ȡιؤƻ ([2012-10-12-1])
#2865. Ĥ䤹ڵä䤹ڵؤΥҥȡ ([2017-03-01-1])
#1051. Ѹ˸оݤȤʤ (1) ([2012-03-13-1])
#1052. Ѹ˸оݤȤʤ (2) ([2012-03-14-1])
Clark, Cecily. "Onomastics." The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 1. Ed. Richard M. Hogg. Cambridge: CUP, 1992. 452--89.
̾ؼ (toponymist) ϴ˸äƸ椹뤳Ȥ¿Ȥ Google Earth 3ǥϿޥեȤʤɤѤ륳ԥ塼κȤ¿ʤäƤ褦եɥȤϸʬ礫ʤȤ
åȥɤ̾椷Ƥ Simon Taylor Ȥ̾ؼԤͭ̾ؤ˴ؤϥɥ֥åΤʤ1ǡեɥˤĤƼΤ褦˽Ƥ롥̾ؼԤָ֤ɤäʤȻפäΤǰѤƤ
There is much in the life and work of the toponymist which involves sitting at a desk, whether at home, in a library, or in an archive. Equally, there are aspects essential to the work which involve 'getting out and about'; for the purposes not just of interrogating those who live in a landscape, as in the collection of oral material, but of interrogating the landscape itself. There are many cases in which the landscape offers the key to the interpretation of a name. Ambiguity and doubt abound especially in the interpretation of names which have been mediated by a language or languages different from the one in which they were originally coined, and it is often only a careful consideration of the physical landscape, past and present, which can offer any chance of certainty. While some of this can be done through maps, and with the recently available online resources such as Google Earth and the 3D modelling of maps in such programs as Fugawi UK, there is, for the foreseeable future at least, no substitute for being in and moving through the actual landscape.
Even in cases in which there is little or no doubt concerning a given element, a detailed engagement with the landscape can shed much light on the precise definition and application of the element involved, bringing us closer to the mindset and motivations of the original name-givers. (Taylor 75)
ʤۤɡ֤ϳ֤äƤȤƤ⡤֤ͭСĤƤ̾դưĤʤɤˤĤƲԥ졼뤫⤷ʤȤȤʤΤϡˤ˴ϢʬǤС̾˸¤餺ɤоݤˤĤƤ뤳Ȥ⤷ʤϲȤˤʤˤƤǤ뤳ȤƤΤΤʤȤФäƤʤdz˷Ф
Taylor, Simon. "Methodologies in Place-name Research." Chapter 5 of The Oxford Handbook of Names and Naming. Ed. Carole Hough. Oxford: OUP, 2016. 69--86.
#5036. 3Ĥ --- ظδä롡ǡ٤ ([2023-02-09-1]) ǾҲ𤷤 Gunter Senft ˡк ͡Ϥ ҡظδä롡ǡʳҡ2022ǯˤνϤǤϡ (pragmatics) غŪʬǤ뤳ȤĴƤ (4--5)
ΤȤϡּҲؤ䲿ءפǤʤؤΤ¾ŪʲʬˤȤäơᥪ顦ȥޥ (Jan-Ola Östman) (1988: 28) ȤΡŪʡǽ̤Ƥ뤳ȤŤ˰̣롥Mey (1994: 3268) Ҥ٤Ƥ褦ˡָθϤäѤ̣ʬ˸ꤵȤ櫓ǤϤʤϡĸ̩˶ڤƤ븦ΰȤϡߤ˴طνޤסϡξưʸҲʸ̮ޤ줿ѼԤλ顤θؿ˱͡ʼˡغŪʥץȤȤ̣ͭʻѤˤĤƸ椹Ǥ롥
غˤ桹ϡ1970ǯ夬ؤˤơָŪžפʤ줿10ǯ֤ǤäȤĥ뤳Ȥˤʤ롥άͤγʬγˤȤʤΰͤƤߤȡůءءưʪưءΥեҲءؤʤɤ¾γʬȴϢĤȤȤˤγʬˤŪ֤뤳Ȥ˵Ť
ܽǤϡؤˤܼŪ˳غŪʬǤǤʤҲŪưؤδŪʴؿͭʸʳؤˤ뤫ʤ깭ϰϤ͡ʬӤĤߤ˱ƶ礦ʬŪʳפǤ뤳ȤǤδؿָκϼҲŪưȤƤθεҤǤ (Clift et al. 2009: 509) ȤοäȤܽΥ饤ȥդ1Ĥ롥
6Ĥʬ֤̾Ƥ뤬ºݤΤȤʬܽξΩƤȿǤƤ롥
1ϡů --- ϸѤȤԤºݤ˲̣ΤʸȲäδޤߤ ---
2ϡȿ --- ľؼȥ㡼 ---
3ϡȿʹֹư --- ߥ˥ưʪŪ ---
4ϡȥΥե --- 졤ʸǧΤΥե ---
5ϡȼҲ --- ˤҲŪ߹ ---
6ϡ --- 졤Ҳ顤ͼȶ顤쥤ǥ ---
Ūäȶªɤ⤢뤬 Senft ܻؤμܤäƤޤۤɤ˹
Senft, Gunter ˡк ͡Ϥ ҡˡظδä롡ǡ١ҡ2022ǯ
ε#5018. khelf С4ͤǥȥʲҼΥɤǡإ˥¼ŵ٤ in Voicy ([2023-01-22-1]) ǾҲ𤷤ޤ6ĤǤĤӤ Voicy #600. إ˥¼ŵ٤ --- ѸȥθˡȤ¿İƤޤäȤ khelfʷѸ˥ե˴ȤĤǤμϿǤӤΤ⤷ä褦ǤдǤ
ϿȶʸǼӤƳƤ⤷ƤȤݤǤǰ㤤ѤȤˡϡѸܳŪ̻ŪˤѤǤޤ¼ǤѱѼǤ⡤ڡϤϷǤС褽Ū˿ǤǤƤޤ㤨Ϸޤǥݥԥ顼 The Concise Oxford Dictionary Υʺǿ12ǡˤѤСͥ100ǯĶ̻ŪʴѻǽǤWebster ϤμʤɤǤϡ200ǯˤ錄ѸεҤɤ뤳ȤǤޤ伫ȤʣμΰۤʤǤӤƱѸ˸ԤʤäƤޤ㤨аʲʸǤϡҤ鼭ӤƤޤ
Hotta, Ryuichi. "Thesauri or Thesauruses? A Diachronic Distribution of Plural Forms for Latin-Derived Nouns Ending in -us." Journal of the Faculty of Letters: Language, Literature and Culture 106 (2010): 117--36.
Hotta, Ryuichi. "Noun-Verb Stress Alternation: An Example of Continuing Lexical Diffusion in Present-Day English." Journal of the Faculty of Letters: Language, Literature and Culture 110 (2012): 39--63.
ˡȤƤϥץDZѤ䤹褦˸ޤդɬפǤƱ쥷μǤäƤԻˤӤƤȤϸ¤ʤǤϡǼҤˤäơԻԤˤäơλθؤĬήˡˤäơҼȵϼδ֤ɤưΤǤäơΩäƼɾɬפȤʤޤΤˡԤˤϼؤ伭ˤ˴ؤܤɬפȤʤäƤޤۤʤ륷μȤ߹碌Ƹ椹ˤϡ˿ŤʻɾǤ礦
Ρإ˥¼ŵ٤Ӥ heldio ϡޤƳŪʤΤǤܳŪʸѤȯŸ褦ȤСƱμ textual criticism ɬפȤʤ뤳ȤĴƤȻפޤ
Voicy ֱѸθ츻ȤˤĤ饸 (heldio) ǤϡkhelfʷѸ˥եˤرС3̾ȤȤ#600. إ˥¼ŵ٤ --- ѸȥθˡϤޤȥʲҤ˴ؤ륭ɤˤĤơإ˥¼ŵ٤νǤǿ6ǤޤǤ١Ѹˤ칶4ͤ䤳Ȥ٤ꤷƤޤճȯ꼡ǡ夬Ȥʤޤ30ʬۤɤĹǤ֤ΤȤˤİФȻפޤVoicy Υȵǽˤꡤۤʤɤ⤪ޤȴǤ
Ӥإ˥¼ŵ٤6ĤǤνǯޤȤƤޤ5--8ǯߤǡ褽Ū˽ǤƤꡤ1ĤΥŵDZѸεҤ̻Ūɤ뤳ȤǽȤʤäƤޤ
| ǯ | |
|---|---|
| G1 | 1987ǯ |
| G2 | 1993ǯ |
| G3 | 2001ǯ |
| G4 | 2006ǯ |
| G5 | 2014ǯ |
| G6 | 2022ǯ |
Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow