{"title":"再次关于符文单词 urnordic rūnō-","authors":"M. Schulte","doi":"10.1515/bgsl-2024-2001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The discovery of a stone fragment from Svingerud/Hole in Norway, whose inscription is dated between 1/25 and 250 CE, attests to the early use of rūnō (cf. Zilmer/Vasshus 2023) as opposed to rūnōʀ. The plural rūnōʀ (ON rúnar) is attested on runestones of the Classical and Post-classical runic periods including C-bracteates. The paper aims to clarify whether rūnō is to be understood soberly with Morris (1985) and Antonsen (1980) as a term of everyday language ›message, inscription‹ to be distinguished from Goth. rūna ›mystery, secret, counsel‹, or rather as a term for ›secret, orally presented knowledge‹, before being linked up to the fuþark and writing in runes in the due course of its history.","PeriodicalId":512252,"journal":{"name":"Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur","volume":"21 s1","pages":"237 - 258"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nochmals zum Runenwort urnordisch rūnō-\",\"authors\":\"M. Schulte\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/bgsl-2024-2001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The discovery of a stone fragment from Svingerud/Hole in Norway, whose inscription is dated between 1/25 and 250 CE, attests to the early use of rūnō (cf. Zilmer/Vasshus 2023) as opposed to rūnōʀ. The plural rūnōʀ (ON rúnar) is attested on runestones of the Classical and Post-classical runic periods including C-bracteates. The paper aims to clarify whether rūnō is to be understood soberly with Morris (1985) and Antonsen (1980) as a term of everyday language ›message, inscription‹ to be distinguished from Goth. rūna ›mystery, secret, counsel‹, or rather as a term for ›secret, orally presented knowledge‹, before being linked up to the fuþark and writing in runes in the due course of its history.\",\"PeriodicalId\":512252,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur\",\"volume\":\"21 s1\",\"pages\":\"237 - 258\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/bgsl-2024-2001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bgsl-2024-2001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The discovery of a stone fragment from Svingerud/Hole in Norway, whose inscription is dated between 1/25 and 250 CE, attests to the early use of rūnō (cf. Zilmer/Vasshus 2023) as opposed to rūnōʀ. The plural rūnōʀ (ON rúnar) is attested on runestones of the Classical and Post-classical runic periods including C-bracteates. The paper aims to clarify whether rūnō is to be understood soberly with Morris (1985) and Antonsen (1980) as a term of everyday language ›message, inscription‹ to be distinguished from Goth. rūna ›mystery, secret, counsel‹, or rather as a term for ›secret, orally presented knowledge‹, before being linked up to the fuþark and writing in runes in the due course of its history.