“Shaw†→ “Shavian†– why “vâ€�
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
12
down vote
favorite
The spelling for the adjective derived from the name Shaw is Shavian and not Shawian. Similarly you can find Arrow → Arrovian and Harrow → Harrovian. This strikes me as odd.
First of all, I accept that the adjective for /ʃɔËÂ/ is pronounced /ʃɔËÂvɪən/, so this is not about the word, just the spelling. Now, I see two possible rationales:
Shavian is phonemically closer since v usually represents /v/ in English orthography and w represents /w/.
Shawian is etymologically closer, without being too distant phonemically since /v/ and /w/ are pretty close.
What strikes me about this is that English orthography usually champions etymology over phonemics, in particular when it comes to proper names. Thus, my question is: Has phonemics just won for once, or is there any other argument for spelling these adjectives with a v?
orthography toponyms eponyms
asked Aug 11 at 14:19
Wrzlprmft
3,4272141
add a comment |Â
up vote
12
down vote
favorite
The spelling for the adjective derived from the name Shaw is Shavian and not Shawian. Similarly you can find Arrow → Arrovian and Harrow → Harrovian. This strikes me as odd.
First of all, I accept that the adjective for /ʃɔËÂ/ is pronounced /ʃɔËÂvɪən/, so this is not about the word, just the spelling. Now, I see two possible rationales:
Shavian is phonemically closer since v usually represents /v/ in English orthography and w represents /w/.
Shawian is etymologically closer, without being too distant phonemically since /v/ and /w/ are pretty close.
What strikes me about this is that English orthography usually champions etymology over phonemics, in particular when it comes to proper names. Thus, my question is: Has phonemics just won for once, or is there any other argument for spelling these adjectives with a v?
orthography toponyms eponyms
asked Aug 11 at 14:19
Wrzlprmft
3,4272141
5
Re: "English orthography usually champions etymology over phonemics, in particular when it comes to proper names": I think that's an oversimplification. Note that Aristotelian is not spelled like Aristotle, Neapolitan like Naples, Norwegian like Norway, Venetian like Venice, Welsh like Wales, etc. And given that "Shaw" is not pronounced with an actual /w/, it's not too strange to drop the "w" before adding "-vian", just as we regularly drop final vowel letters (cf. the dropped 'a' in Canadian, 'e' in Irish, 'i' in Kiribatese, 'o' in Mexican, and 'y' in Italian).
– ruakh
Aug 11 at 16:13
3
As for the pronunciation, wiktionary says /ˈʃeɪvɪən/. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Shavian#Pronunciation
– Rosie F
Aug 11 at 17:52
3
There is nothing "odd" about Harrovian, and it has no obvious connection with Shaw. The Latin name of the town Harrow was "Harrovia". Other place names follow a similar pattern, for example "Cantabrigian" from "Cambridge"
– alephzero
Aug 12 at 1:54
2
@alephzero: Actually, going by some of the existing answers, there does seem to be a connection: Etymology takes a detour via Latin.
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 12 at 6:15
add a comment |Â
up vote
12
down vote
favorite
up vote
12
down vote
favorite
The spelling for the adjective derived from the name Shaw is Shavian and not Shawian. Similarly you can find Arrow → Arrovian and Harrow → Harrovian. This strikes me as odd.
First of all, I accept that the adjective for /ʃɔËÂ/ is pronounced /ʃɔËÂvɪən/, so this is not about the word, just the spelling. Now, I see two possible rationales:
Shavian is phonemically closer since v usually represents /v/ in English orthography and w represents /w/.
Shawian is etymologically closer, without being too distant phonemically since /v/ and /w/ are pretty close.
What strikes me about this is that English orthography usually champions etymology over phonemics, in particular when it comes to proper names. Thus, my question is: Has phonemics just won for once, or is there any other argument for spelling these adjectives with a v?
orthography toponyms eponyms
asked Aug 11 at 14:19
Wrzlprmft
3,4272141
The spelling for the adjective derived from the name Shaw is Shavian and not Shawian. Similarly you can find Arrow → Arrovian and Harrow → Harrovian. This strikes me as odd.
First of all, I accept that the adjective for /ʃɔËÂ/ is pronounced /ʃɔËÂvɪən/, so this is not about the word, just the spelling. Now, I see two possible rationales:
Shavian is phonemically closer since v usually represents /v/ in English orthography and w represents /w/.
Shawian is etymologically closer, without being too distant phonemically since /v/ and /w/ are pretty close.
What strikes me about this is that English orthography usually champions etymology over phonemics, in particular when it comes to proper names. Thus, my question is: Has phonemics just won for once, or is there any other argument for spelling these adjectives with a v?
orthography toponyms eponyms
orthography toponyms eponyms
asked Aug 11 at 14:19
Wrzlprmft
3,4272141
asked Aug 11 at 14:19
Wrzlprmft
3,4272141
asked Aug 11 at 14:19
Wrzlprmft
3,4272141
asked Aug 11 at 14:19
Wrzlprmft
3,4272141
asked Aug 11 at 14:19
Wrzlprmft
3,4272141
3,4272141
5
Re: "English orthography usually champions etymology over phonemics, in particular when it comes to proper names": I think that's an oversimplification. Note that Aristotelian is not spelled like Aristotle, Neapolitan like Naples, Norwegian like Norway, Venetian like Venice, Welsh like Wales, etc. And given that "Shaw" is not pronounced with an actual /w/, it's not too strange to drop the "w" before adding "-vian", just as we regularly drop final vowel letters (cf. the dropped 'a' in Canadian, 'e' in Irish, 'i' in Kiribatese, 'o' in Mexican, and 'y' in Italian).
– ruakh
Aug 11 at 16:13
3
As for the pronunciation, wiktionary says /ˈʃeɪvɪən/. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Shavian#Pronunciation
– Rosie F
Aug 11 at 17:52
3
There is nothing "odd" about Harrovian, and it has no obvious connection with Shaw. The Latin name of the town Harrow was "Harrovia". Other place names follow a similar pattern, for example "Cantabrigian" from "Cambridge"
– alephzero
Aug 12 at 1:54
2
@alephzero: Actually, going by some of the existing answers, there does seem to be a connection: Etymology takes a detour via Latin.
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 12 at 6:15
add a comment |Â
5
Re: "English orthography usually champions etymology over phonemics, in particular when it comes to proper names": I think that's an oversimplification. Note that Aristotelian is not spelled like Aristotle, Neapolitan like Naples, Norwegian like Norway, Venetian like Venice, Welsh like Wales, etc. And given that "Shaw" is not pronounced with an actual /w/, it's not too strange to drop the "w" before adding "-vian", just as we regularly drop final vowel letters (cf. the dropped 'a' in Canadian, 'e' in Irish, 'i' in Kiribatese, 'o' in Mexican, and 'y' in Italian).
– ruakh
Aug 11 at 16:13
3
As for the pronunciation, wiktionary says /ˈʃeɪvɪən/. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Shavian#Pronunciation
– Rosie F
Aug 11 at 17:52
3
There is nothing "odd" about Harrovian, and it has no obvious connection with Shaw. The Latin name of the town Harrow was "Harrovia". Other place names follow a similar pattern, for example "Cantabrigian" from "Cambridge"
– alephzero
Aug 12 at 1:54
2
@alephzero: Actually, going by some of the existing answers, there does seem to be a connection: Etymology takes a detour via Latin.
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 12 at 6:15
5
5
Re: "English orthography usually champions etymology over phonemics, in particular when it comes to proper names": I think that's an oversimplification. Note that Aristotelian is not spelled like Aristotle, Neapolitan like Naples, Norwegian like Norway, Venetian like Venice, Welsh like Wales, etc. And given that "Shaw" is not pronounced with an actual /w/, it's not too strange to drop the "w" before adding "-vian", just as we regularly drop final vowel letters (cf. the dropped 'a' in Canadian, 'e' in Irish, 'i' in Kiribatese, 'o' in Mexican, and 'y' in Italian).
– ruakh
Aug 11 at 16:13
Re: "English orthography usually champions etymology over phonemics, in particular when it comes to proper names": I think that's an oversimplification. Note that Aristotelian is not spelled like Aristotle, Neapolitan like Naples, Norwegian like Norway, Venetian like Venice, Welsh like Wales, etc. And given that "Shaw" is not pronounced with an actual /w/, it's not too strange to drop the "w" before adding "-vian", just as we regularly drop final vowel letters (cf. the dropped 'a' in Canadian, 'e' in Irish, 'i' in Kiribatese, 'o' in Mexican, and 'y' in Italian).
– ruakh
Aug 11 at 16:13
3
3
As for the pronunciation, wiktionary says /ˈʃeɪvɪən/. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Shavian#Pronunciation
– Rosie F
Aug 11 at 17:52
As for the pronunciation, wiktionary says /ˈʃeɪvɪən/. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Shavian#Pronunciation
– Rosie F
Aug 11 at 17:52
3
3
There is nothing "odd" about Harrovian, and it has no obvious connection with Shaw. The Latin name of the town Harrow was "Harrovia". Other place names follow a similar pattern, for example "Cantabrigian" from "Cambridge"
– alephzero
Aug 12 at 1:54
There is nothing "odd" about Harrovian, and it has no obvious connection with Shaw. The Latin name of the town Harrow was "Harrovia". Other place names follow a similar pattern, for example "Cantabrigian" from "Cambridge"
– alephzero
Aug 12 at 1:54
2
2
@alephzero: Actually, going by some of the existing answers, there does seem to be a connection: Etymology takes a detour via Latin.
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 12 at 6:15
@alephzero: Actually, going by some of the existing answers, there does seem to be a connection: Etymology takes a detour via Latin.
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 12 at 6:15
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
14
down vote
It is said that Shaw disliked the adjective "Shawian" (which does look and sound awkward) and proposed to invent a new one.
He Latinized (sort of) his surname, from Shaw to Shavius (there is no "w" in Latin, while "u" is spelled as "v").
Shavius naturally lends itself to Shavian.
At least that is the explanation given in the Dictionary of Eponyms
by Martin Manser, which is available online in fragments (and also in its complete form for a fee).
answered Aug 11 at 14:56
Ricky
13.1k32972
1
Thank you for your answer. Can you elaborate to what extent this translates to other cases such as Arrow → Arrovian and Harrow → Harrovian?
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 11 at 15:31
1
Well, I would imagine that they just follow the pattern set by Shaw. I mean, the fellow is sufficiently famous to be viewed as a trailblazer.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:32
4
@Ricky I think you mean trailblavian.
– David Richerby
Aug 11 at 17:50
@DavidRicherby Thank you for pointing that out. I stand corrected: trailblavian, of course.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 23:51
Of course, there is no ‘sh’ in Latin either. If he’d really wanted to Latinise his surname, he would have gone for Scagian (since his name, Shaw, comes from the word meaning a copse or thicket, from Old English sceaga, itself from Proto-Germanic *skag(Ã…Ân)-, which would have been Latinised as *scaga). The lazy bastard.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:40
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
4
down vote
Frank McNally in the Irish Times says it's a mystery, but he thinks it may because of rhoticity Shavian lather – An Irishman’s Diary on descriptive derivatives, while Morton S Freeman alleges that Shaw invented it himself, by 'Latinising' his surname. A New Dictionary of Eponyms
answered Aug 11 at 15:03
Michael Harvey
4,59711019
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Just throwing another one into the pot..
According to 'the surname database' Shaw has several different modern-day versions:
the modern forms of the surname range from Shaw(e), Shay and Shay(e)s
to Shave(s) and Shafe.
Accordingly Shave → Shavian would still be an etymological derivation as I understand it.
The article claims that Shaw derives from 'sceaga'.
As a topographical name, Shaw was used for someone who lived by a
copse, wood, or thicket, derived from the Old English pre 7th Century
"sceaga", copse, small wood. As a locational surname, Shaw is derived
from any one of the numerous small places names Shaw, from the Old
English "sceaga", such as those in Berkshire, Lancashire, and
Wiltshire.
Throughout the centuries, surnames in every country have continued to
"develop" often leading to astonishing variants of the original
spelling
answered Aug 11 at 15:16
S Conroy
1,9451319
2
Ha ha... No the reason I googled this is because I thought it might be related to the Irish language where 'bh' is sometimes pronounced 'v' and sometimes 'w'. I was interested to see if it was originally 'Shabh' or the like.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:25
@S Conroy As I mentioned earlier, you can't blame everything on the Irish.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:27
1
@Ricky. To be fair, if you're looking for someone to blame..., it was the English who turned Ireland into an English speaking country, which leads to confusion when the original Irish spelling perseveres. On the way to off-topic though.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:37
Not a bad thought, actually. Had it been an Irish name, something like Seábh, there might have been something to it. Realistically, though, it would be hard to find a context where the final consonant of a surname is palatalised when deriving an adjective; it’s usually the other way around (e.g., surname Ó Domhnaill, with slender /Lʲ/ → adjectival Domhnallach with broad /LË /).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:45
That piece of pure speculation wasn't so much related to the patterns within the Irish language, more to the idea of variant anglicisations of an Irish name. Historically in Ireland the Irish language was supressed, and most Irish surnames and place names have been anglicised. So my would-be etymology was more on the lines of a potential (non existant as it turns out) original Irish name Shabh being anglicised with different versions and different pronunciations, e.g. Shaw and Shav.
– S Conroy
Sep 2 at 23:10
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
14
down vote
It is said that Shaw disliked the adjective "Shawian" (which does look and sound awkward) and proposed to invent a new one.
He Latinized (sort of) his surname, from Shaw to Shavius (there is no "w" in Latin, while "u" is spelled as "v").
Shavius naturally lends itself to Shavian.
At least that is the explanation given in the Dictionary of Eponyms
by Martin Manser, which is available online in fragments (and also in its complete form for a fee).
answered Aug 11 at 14:56
Ricky
13.1k32972
1
Thank you for your answer. Can you elaborate to what extent this translates to other cases such as Arrow → Arrovian and Harrow → Harrovian?
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 11 at 15:31
1
Well, I would imagine that they just follow the pattern set by Shaw. I mean, the fellow is sufficiently famous to be viewed as a trailblazer.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:32
4
@Ricky I think you mean trailblavian.
– David Richerby
Aug 11 at 17:50
@DavidRicherby Thank you for pointing that out. I stand corrected: trailblavian, of course.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 23:51
Of course, there is no ‘sh’ in Latin either. If he’d really wanted to Latinise his surname, he would have gone for Scagian (since his name, Shaw, comes from the word meaning a copse or thicket, from Old English sceaga, itself from Proto-Germanic *skag(Ã…Ân)-, which would have been Latinised as *scaga). The lazy bastard.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:40
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
14
down vote
It is said that Shaw disliked the adjective "Shawian" (which does look and sound awkward) and proposed to invent a new one.
He Latinized (sort of) his surname, from Shaw to Shavius (there is no "w" in Latin, while "u" is spelled as "v").
Shavius naturally lends itself to Shavian.
At least that is the explanation given in the Dictionary of Eponyms
by Martin Manser, which is available online in fragments (and also in its complete form for a fee).
answered Aug 11 at 14:56
Ricky
13.1k32972
1
Thank you for your answer. Can you elaborate to what extent this translates to other cases such as Arrow → Arrovian and Harrow → Harrovian?
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 11 at 15:31
1
Well, I would imagine that they just follow the pattern set by Shaw. I mean, the fellow is sufficiently famous to be viewed as a trailblazer.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:32
4
@Ricky I think you mean trailblavian.
– David Richerby
Aug 11 at 17:50
@DavidRicherby Thank you for pointing that out. I stand corrected: trailblavian, of course.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 23:51
Of course, there is no ‘sh’ in Latin either. If he’d really wanted to Latinise his surname, he would have gone for Scagian (since his name, Shaw, comes from the word meaning a copse or thicket, from Old English sceaga, itself from Proto-Germanic *skag(Ã…Ân)-, which would have been Latinised as *scaga). The lazy bastard.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:40
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
14
down vote
up vote
14
down vote
It is said that Shaw disliked the adjective "Shawian" (which does look and sound awkward) and proposed to invent a new one.
He Latinized (sort of) his surname, from Shaw to Shavius (there is no "w" in Latin, while "u" is spelled as "v").
Shavius naturally lends itself to Shavian.
At least that is the explanation given in the Dictionary of Eponyms
by Martin Manser, which is available online in fragments (and also in its complete form for a fee).
answered Aug 11 at 14:56
Ricky
13.1k32972
It is said that Shaw disliked the adjective "Shawian" (which does look and sound awkward) and proposed to invent a new one.
He Latinized (sort of) his surname, from Shaw to Shavius (there is no "w" in Latin, while "u" is spelled as "v").
Shavius naturally lends itself to Shavian.
At least that is the explanation given in the Dictionary of Eponyms
by Martin Manser, which is available online in fragments (and also in its complete form for a fee).
answered Aug 11 at 14:56
Ricky
13.1k32972
answered Aug 11 at 14:56
Ricky
13.1k32972
answered Aug 11 at 14:56
Ricky
13.1k32972
answered Aug 11 at 14:56
Ricky
13.1k32972
13.1k32972
1
Thank you for your answer. Can you elaborate to what extent this translates to other cases such as Arrow → Arrovian and Harrow → Harrovian?
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 11 at 15:31
1
Well, I would imagine that they just follow the pattern set by Shaw. I mean, the fellow is sufficiently famous to be viewed as a trailblazer.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:32
4
@Ricky I think you mean trailblavian.
– David Richerby
Aug 11 at 17:50
@DavidRicherby Thank you for pointing that out. I stand corrected: trailblavian, of course.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 23:51
Of course, there is no ‘sh’ in Latin either. If he’d really wanted to Latinise his surname, he would have gone for Scagian (since his name, Shaw, comes from the word meaning a copse or thicket, from Old English sceaga, itself from Proto-Germanic *skag(Ã…Ân)-, which would have been Latinised as *scaga). The lazy bastard.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:40
 |Â
show 1 more comment
1
Thank you for your answer. Can you elaborate to what extent this translates to other cases such as Arrow → Arrovian and Harrow → Harrovian?
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 11 at 15:31
1
Well, I would imagine that they just follow the pattern set by Shaw. I mean, the fellow is sufficiently famous to be viewed as a trailblazer.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:32
4
@Ricky I think you mean trailblavian.
– David Richerby
Aug 11 at 17:50
@DavidRicherby Thank you for pointing that out. I stand corrected: trailblavian, of course.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 23:51
Of course, there is no ‘sh’ in Latin either. If he’d really wanted to Latinise his surname, he would have gone for Scagian (since his name, Shaw, comes from the word meaning a copse or thicket, from Old English sceaga, itself from Proto-Germanic *skag(Ã…Ân)-, which would have been Latinised as *scaga). The lazy bastard.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:40
1
1
Thank you for your answer. Can you elaborate to what extent this translates to other cases such as Arrow → Arrovian and Harrow → Harrovian?
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 11 at 15:31
Thank you for your answer. Can you elaborate to what extent this translates to other cases such as Arrow → Arrovian and Harrow → Harrovian?
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 11 at 15:31
1
1
Well, I would imagine that they just follow the pattern set by Shaw. I mean, the fellow is sufficiently famous to be viewed as a trailblazer.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:32
Well, I would imagine that they just follow the pattern set by Shaw. I mean, the fellow is sufficiently famous to be viewed as a trailblazer.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:32
4
4
@Ricky I think you mean trailblavian.
– David Richerby
Aug 11 at 17:50
@Ricky I think you mean trailblavian.
– David Richerby
Aug 11 at 17:50
@DavidRicherby Thank you for pointing that out. I stand corrected: trailblavian, of course.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 23:51
@DavidRicherby Thank you for pointing that out. I stand corrected: trailblavian, of course.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 23:51
Of course, there is no ‘sh’ in Latin either. If he’d really wanted to Latinise his surname, he would have gone for Scagian (since his name, Shaw, comes from the word meaning a copse or thicket, from Old English sceaga, itself from Proto-Germanic *skag(Ã…Ân)-, which would have been Latinised as *scaga). The lazy bastard.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:40
Of course, there is no ‘sh’ in Latin either. If he’d really wanted to Latinise his surname, he would have gone for Scagian (since his name, Shaw, comes from the word meaning a copse or thicket, from Old English sceaga, itself from Proto-Germanic *skag(Ã…Ân)-, which would have been Latinised as *scaga). The lazy bastard.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:40
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
4
down vote
Frank McNally in the Irish Times says it's a mystery, but he thinks it may because of rhoticity Shavian lather – An Irishman’s Diary on descriptive derivatives, while Morton S Freeman alleges that Shaw invented it himself, by 'Latinising' his surname. A New Dictionary of Eponyms
answered Aug 11 at 15:03
Michael Harvey
4,59711019
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
Frank McNally in the Irish Times says it's a mystery, but he thinks it may because of rhoticity Shavian lather – An Irishman’s Diary on descriptive derivatives, while Morton S Freeman alleges that Shaw invented it himself, by 'Latinising' his surname. A New Dictionary of Eponyms
answered Aug 11 at 15:03
Michael Harvey
4,59711019
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
Frank McNally in the Irish Times says it's a mystery, but he thinks it may because of rhoticity Shavian lather – An Irishman’s Diary on descriptive derivatives, while Morton S Freeman alleges that Shaw invented it himself, by 'Latinising' his surname. A New Dictionary of Eponyms
answered Aug 11 at 15:03
Michael Harvey
4,59711019
Frank McNally in the Irish Times says it's a mystery, but he thinks it may because of rhoticity Shavian lather – An Irishman’s Diary on descriptive derivatives, while Morton S Freeman alleges that Shaw invented it himself, by 'Latinising' his surname. A New Dictionary of Eponyms
answered Aug 11 at 15:03
Michael Harvey
4,59711019
answered Aug 11 at 15:03
Michael Harvey
4,59711019
answered Aug 11 at 15:03
Michael Harvey
4,59711019
answered Aug 11 at 15:03
Michael Harvey
4,59711019
4,59711019
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Just throwing another one into the pot..
According to 'the surname database' Shaw has several different modern-day versions:
the modern forms of the surname range from Shaw(e), Shay and Shay(e)s
to Shave(s) and Shafe.
Accordingly Shave → Shavian would still be an etymological derivation as I understand it.
The article claims that Shaw derives from 'sceaga'.
As a topographical name, Shaw was used for someone who lived by a
copse, wood, or thicket, derived from the Old English pre 7th Century
"sceaga", copse, small wood. As a locational surname, Shaw is derived
from any one of the numerous small places names Shaw, from the Old
English "sceaga", such as those in Berkshire, Lancashire, and
Wiltshire.
Throughout the centuries, surnames in every country have continued to
"develop" often leading to astonishing variants of the original
spelling
answered Aug 11 at 15:16
S Conroy
1,9451319
2
Ha ha... No the reason I googled this is because I thought it might be related to the Irish language where 'bh' is sometimes pronounced 'v' and sometimes 'w'. I was interested to see if it was originally 'Shabh' or the like.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:25
@S Conroy As I mentioned earlier, you can't blame everything on the Irish.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:27
1
@Ricky. To be fair, if you're looking for someone to blame..., it was the English who turned Ireland into an English speaking country, which leads to confusion when the original Irish spelling perseveres. On the way to off-topic though.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:37
Not a bad thought, actually. Had it been an Irish name, something like Seábh, there might have been something to it. Realistically, though, it would be hard to find a context where the final consonant of a surname is palatalised when deriving an adjective; it’s usually the other way around (e.g., surname Ó Domhnaill, with slender /Lʲ/ → adjectival Domhnallach with broad /LË /).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:45
That piece of pure speculation wasn't so much related to the patterns within the Irish language, more to the idea of variant anglicisations of an Irish name. Historically in Ireland the Irish language was supressed, and most Irish surnames and place names have been anglicised. So my would-be etymology was more on the lines of a potential (non existant as it turns out) original Irish name Shabh being anglicised with different versions and different pronunciations, e.g. Shaw and Shav.
– S Conroy
Sep 2 at 23:10
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Just throwing another one into the pot..
According to 'the surname database' Shaw has several different modern-day versions:
the modern forms of the surname range from Shaw(e), Shay and Shay(e)s
to Shave(s) and Shafe.
Accordingly Shave → Shavian would still be an etymological derivation as I understand it.
The article claims that Shaw derives from 'sceaga'.
As a topographical name, Shaw was used for someone who lived by a
copse, wood, or thicket, derived from the Old English pre 7th Century
"sceaga", copse, small wood. As a locational surname, Shaw is derived
from any one of the numerous small places names Shaw, from the Old
English "sceaga", such as those in Berkshire, Lancashire, and
Wiltshire.
Throughout the centuries, surnames in every country have continued to
"develop" often leading to astonishing variants of the original
spelling
answered Aug 11 at 15:16
S Conroy
1,9451319
2
Ha ha... No the reason I googled this is because I thought it might be related to the Irish language where 'bh' is sometimes pronounced 'v' and sometimes 'w'. I was interested to see if it was originally 'Shabh' or the like.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:25
@S Conroy As I mentioned earlier, you can't blame everything on the Irish.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:27
1
@Ricky. To be fair, if you're looking for someone to blame..., it was the English who turned Ireland into an English speaking country, which leads to confusion when the original Irish spelling perseveres. On the way to off-topic though.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:37
Not a bad thought, actually. Had it been an Irish name, something like Seábh, there might have been something to it. Realistically, though, it would be hard to find a context where the final consonant of a surname is palatalised when deriving an adjective; it’s usually the other way around (e.g., surname Ó Domhnaill, with slender /Lʲ/ → adjectival Domhnallach with broad /LË /).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:45
That piece of pure speculation wasn't so much related to the patterns within the Irish language, more to the idea of variant anglicisations of an Irish name. Historically in Ireland the Irish language was supressed, and most Irish surnames and place names have been anglicised. So my would-be etymology was more on the lines of a potential (non existant as it turns out) original Irish name Shabh being anglicised with different versions and different pronunciations, e.g. Shaw and Shav.
– S Conroy
Sep 2 at 23:10
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Just throwing another one into the pot..
According to 'the surname database' Shaw has several different modern-day versions:
the modern forms of the surname range from Shaw(e), Shay and Shay(e)s
to Shave(s) and Shafe.
Accordingly Shave → Shavian would still be an etymological derivation as I understand it.
The article claims that Shaw derives from 'sceaga'.
As a topographical name, Shaw was used for someone who lived by a
copse, wood, or thicket, derived from the Old English pre 7th Century
"sceaga", copse, small wood. As a locational surname, Shaw is derived
from any one of the numerous small places names Shaw, from the Old
English "sceaga", such as those in Berkshire, Lancashire, and
Wiltshire.
Throughout the centuries, surnames in every country have continued to
"develop" often leading to astonishing variants of the original
spelling
answered Aug 11 at 15:16
S Conroy
1,9451319
Just throwing another one into the pot..
According to 'the surname database' Shaw has several different modern-day versions:
the modern forms of the surname range from Shaw(e), Shay and Shay(e)s
to Shave(s) and Shafe.
Accordingly Shave → Shavian would still be an etymological derivation as I understand it.
The article claims that Shaw derives from 'sceaga'.
As a topographical name, Shaw was used for someone who lived by a
copse, wood, or thicket, derived from the Old English pre 7th Century
"sceaga", copse, small wood. As a locational surname, Shaw is derived
from any one of the numerous small places names Shaw, from the Old
English "sceaga", such as those in Berkshire, Lancashire, and
Wiltshire.
Throughout the centuries, surnames in every country have continued to
"develop" often leading to astonishing variants of the original
spelling
answered Aug 11 at 15:16
S Conroy
1,9451319
answered Aug 11 at 15:16
S Conroy
1,9451319
answered Aug 11 at 15:16
S Conroy
1,9451319
answered Aug 11 at 15:16
S Conroy
1,9451319
1,9451319
2
Ha ha... No the reason I googled this is because I thought it might be related to the Irish language where 'bh' is sometimes pronounced 'v' and sometimes 'w'. I was interested to see if it was originally 'Shabh' or the like.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:25
@S Conroy As I mentioned earlier, you can't blame everything on the Irish.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:27
1
@Ricky. To be fair, if you're looking for someone to blame..., it was the English who turned Ireland into an English speaking country, which leads to confusion when the original Irish spelling perseveres. On the way to off-topic though.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:37
Not a bad thought, actually. Had it been an Irish name, something like Seábh, there might have been something to it. Realistically, though, it would be hard to find a context where the final consonant of a surname is palatalised when deriving an adjective; it’s usually the other way around (e.g., surname Ó Domhnaill, with slender /Lʲ/ → adjectival Domhnallach with broad /LË /).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:45
That piece of pure speculation wasn't so much related to the patterns within the Irish language, more to the idea of variant anglicisations of an Irish name. Historically in Ireland the Irish language was supressed, and most Irish surnames and place names have been anglicised. So my would-be etymology was more on the lines of a potential (non existant as it turns out) original Irish name Shabh being anglicised with different versions and different pronunciations, e.g. Shaw and Shav.
– S Conroy
Sep 2 at 23:10
add a comment |Â
2
Ha ha... No the reason I googled this is because I thought it might be related to the Irish language where 'bh' is sometimes pronounced 'v' and sometimes 'w'. I was interested to see if it was originally 'Shabh' or the like.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:25
@S Conroy As I mentioned earlier, you can't blame everything on the Irish.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:27
1
@Ricky. To be fair, if you're looking for someone to blame..., it was the English who turned Ireland into an English speaking country, which leads to confusion when the original Irish spelling perseveres. On the way to off-topic though.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:37
Not a bad thought, actually. Had it been an Irish name, something like Seábh, there might have been something to it. Realistically, though, it would be hard to find a context where the final consonant of a surname is palatalised when deriving an adjective; it’s usually the other way around (e.g., surname Ó Domhnaill, with slender /Lʲ/ → adjectival Domhnallach with broad /LË /).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:45
That piece of pure speculation wasn't so much related to the patterns within the Irish language, more to the idea of variant anglicisations of an Irish name. Historically in Ireland the Irish language was supressed, and most Irish surnames and place names have been anglicised. So my would-be etymology was more on the lines of a potential (non existant as it turns out) original Irish name Shabh being anglicised with different versions and different pronunciations, e.g. Shaw and Shav.
– S Conroy
Sep 2 at 23:10
2
2
Ha ha... No the reason I googled this is because I thought it might be related to the Irish language where 'bh' is sometimes pronounced 'v' and sometimes 'w'. I was interested to see if it was originally 'Shabh' or the like.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:25
Ha ha... No the reason I googled this is because I thought it might be related to the Irish language where 'bh' is sometimes pronounced 'v' and sometimes 'w'. I was interested to see if it was originally 'Shabh' or the like.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:25
@S Conroy As I mentioned earlier, you can't blame everything on the Irish.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:27
@S Conroy As I mentioned earlier, you can't blame everything on the Irish.
– Ricky
Aug 11 at 15:27
1
1
@Ricky. To be fair, if you're looking for someone to blame..., it was the English who turned Ireland into an English speaking country, which leads to confusion when the original Irish spelling perseveres. On the way to off-topic though.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:37
@Ricky. To be fair, if you're looking for someone to blame..., it was the English who turned Ireland into an English speaking country, which leads to confusion when the original Irish spelling perseveres. On the way to off-topic though.
– S Conroy
Aug 11 at 15:37
Not a bad thought, actually. Had it been an Irish name, something like Seábh, there might have been something to it. Realistically, though, it would be hard to find a context where the final consonant of a surname is palatalised when deriving an adjective; it’s usually the other way around (e.g., surname Ó Domhnaill, with slender /Lʲ/ → adjectival Domhnallach with broad /LË /).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:45
Not a bad thought, actually. Had it been an Irish name, something like Seábh, there might have been something to it. Realistically, though, it would be hard to find a context where the final consonant of a surname is palatalised when deriving an adjective; it’s usually the other way around (e.g., surname Ó Domhnaill, with slender /Lʲ/ → adjectival Domhnallach with broad /LË /).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Sep 2 at 9:45
That piece of pure speculation wasn't so much related to the patterns within the Irish language, more to the idea of variant anglicisations of an Irish name. Historically in Ireland the Irish language was supressed, and most Irish surnames and place names have been anglicised. So my would-be etymology was more on the lines of a potential (non existant as it turns out) original Irish name Shabh being anglicised with different versions and different pronunciations, e.g. Shaw and Shav.
– S Conroy
Sep 2 at 23:10
That piece of pure speculation wasn't so much related to the patterns within the Irish language, more to the idea of variant anglicisations of an Irish name. Historically in Ireland the Irish language was supressed, and most Irish surnames and place names have been anglicised. So my would-be etymology was more on the lines of a potential (non existant as it turns out) original Irish name Shabh being anglicised with different versions and different pronunciations, e.g. Shaw and Shav.
– S Conroy
Sep 2 at 23:10
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f459750%2fshaw-%25e2%2586%2592-shavian-why-v%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
5
Re: "English orthography usually champions etymology over phonemics, in particular when it comes to proper names": I think that's an oversimplification. Note that Aristotelian is not spelled like Aristotle, Neapolitan like Naples, Norwegian like Norway, Venetian like Venice, Welsh like Wales, etc. And given that "Shaw" is not pronounced with an actual /w/, it's not too strange to drop the "w" before adding "-vian", just as we regularly drop final vowel letters (cf. the dropped 'a' in Canadian, 'e' in Irish, 'i' in Kiribatese, 'o' in Mexican, and 'y' in Italian).
– ruakh
Aug 11 at 16:13
3
As for the pronunciation, wiktionary says /ˈʃeɪvɪən/. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Shavian#Pronunciation
– Rosie F
Aug 11 at 17:52
3
There is nothing "odd" about Harrovian, and it has no obvious connection with Shaw. The Latin name of the town Harrow was "Harrovia". Other place names follow a similar pattern, for example "Cantabrigian" from "Cambridge"
– alephzero
Aug 12 at 1:54
2
@alephzero: Actually, going by some of the existing answers, there does seem to be a connection: Etymology takes a detour via Latin.
– Wrzlprmft
Aug 12 at 6:15