"de Burgh"

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Pierre Aronax

"de Burgh"

Legg inn av Pierre Aronax » 11 jan 2005 18:57:21

Nathaniel Taylor a écrit:

Well, now I'm wondering just what the rules for use of the the definite
article were in French (or Anglo-Norman) of the 12th / 13th centuries.
Just as Latin would use no article between preposition & noun (de
Burgo), perhaps our expectations of the definite article in modern
French (=> 'du Bourg') are anachronistic. It is possible that 'de
Burgh' or 'de Bourg' would not have offended the contemporary ear.


Mais la forme "de Bourg" n'offense point davantage l'oreille actuelle:
elle renvoie simplement à un toponyme "Bourg", distinct du toponyme
"Le Bourg" (bien que l'un comme l'autre dérivent également du nom
commun "le bourg"). Ainsi, si nous imaginons le comte (fictif) de la
ville de Bourg-la-Reine, il sera "le comte DE Bourg-la-Reine", alors
que, par exemple, une famille française toujours existante qui tire
son nom d'un toponyme "Le Bourg", en Nivernais, s'appelle "DU Bourg de
Bozas".

Pierre

Nathaniel Taylor

Re: "de Burgh"

Legg inn av Nathaniel Taylor » 11 jan 2005 20:43:30

In article <6779ec44.0501110957.8aa3b8f@posting.google.com>,
pierre_aronax@hotmail.com (Pierre Aronax) wrote:

Nathaniel Taylor a écrit:

Well, now I'm wondering just what the rules for use of the the definite
article were in French (or Anglo-Norman) of the 12th / 13th centuries.
Just as Latin would use no article between preposition & noun (de
Burgo), perhaps our expectations of the definite article in modern
French (=> 'du Bourg') are anachronistic. It is possible that 'de
Burgh' or 'de Bourg' would not have offended the contemporary ear.


Mais la forme "de Bourg" n'offense point davantage l'oreille actuelle:
elle renvoie simplement à un toponyme "Bourg", distinct du toponyme
"Le Bourg" (bien que l'un comme l'autre dérivent également du nom
commun "le bourg"). Ainsi, si nous imaginons le comte (fictif) de la
ville de Bourg-la-Reine, il sera "le comte DE Bourg-la-Reine", alors
que, par exemple, une famille française toujours existante qui tire
son nom d'un toponyme "Le Bourg", en Nivernais, s'appelle "DU Bourg de
Bozas".

This is a good point, but one wonders whether this distinction would
have been understood by medieval speakers. The question becomes, at
what point does a toponym become a fixed, indeclinable proper name,
rather a common noun it had originally been. Brice's original question
can only be solved by reviewing contemporary usages, and perhaps
ultimately only on a case-by-case basis. I think people are still
undecided as to which 'burg' gave its name to the family in question.

Nat Taylor

a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»