Talk:Theodoric

RFV discussion: October 2018
Also compare (said to come from OHG Theodoric, from PG *Þeudarīks) and  (saying that NHG Dietrich comes from OHG Diotrih, which is more plausible) --06:58, 21 October 2018 (UTC) But here's another thing which makes it likely that the entry is just English with wrong language header: https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Theodoric&diff=2223793&oldid=2047182. --17:32, 21 October 2018 (UTC) [At least *Diotrih as reconstruction should be 'attestable' through sound-laws and Latin as in here&here.] --84.161.55.16 00:41, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Most sources seem to agree that the name Theodoric gained popularity from the name of, King of the Ostrogoths, whose name in Gothic was (reconstructed) *Þiudareiks, Latinized as Theodericus or Theodoricus. It is difficult or impossible to make out precisely to what extent various forms derive through inheritance from an earlier Proto-Germanic name, and to what extent by gradual changes from a borrowed Latinized form of the name of the great Ostrogoth king. The Latinized form persisted (as the name of several saints) in liturgy and further in written records composed in Latin. Different forms may have coexisted and influenced each other. Eventually d won out over th in German in the , and it is not impossible, as far as I can see, that *Theuderih borrowed from Theodoric turned into *Diotrih in that process. --Lambiam 16:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, that's just speculation, and even if that were correct, then would be incorrect.
 * Only the last sentence is speculation, although it is at the same time 100% true (provided you take account of the reservation “as far as I can see”). I don’t understand how you reach the conclusion that would be incorrect; nothing I wrote implies that. The question is, ultimately, what can be attested.  --Lambiam 18:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't mean that the reconstruction *Þeudarīks would be incorrect, but that the entry (click on it) would be incorrect: If OHG (*)Diotrih would come from Latin (with whatever steps inbetween), then it would be a descendant of a Latin term and not of the Proto-Germanic term.
 * "Thiodericus camerarius" is a brother of St. Gregory's recorded in 1183 -- cited from p.605 of Adolf Socin, Mittelhochdeutches Namenbuch. Basel (1903). So we have the name attested in MHG from Socin. I also note s.v. Dietrich in Wilfried Seibicke Historisches Deutsches Vornamenbuch, Band 1: Theodorich (Abt des Klosters St. Thierry, nordwestl. Reims, gest. 533: 1. Juli), as well as Theodorich II, (Bischof von Orléans, gest. 1022: 27. Jan.) --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:37, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Mittelhochdeutsches Namenbuch gives as src "RU [= "Rappoltsteinisches Urkundenbuch, hrg. v. K. Albrecht. Bd. I. Colmar 1891."] 38, 1183" . That's a Latin text and the "Thiodericus camerarius" is Latin (by Latin context and Latin form). Theodorich could be MHG or NHG (it does exist in NHG), but that doesn't attest OHG Theodoric (instead of something like *Theodoricus or *Theodorih). --84.161.55.16 00:41, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

RFC discussion: June 2018

 * See Reconstruction talk:Proto-Germanic/rīks.