Re: Bunty.

Den 20. jun. 2008 kl. 00.04 skreiv Daniel Prohaska:
>
>
> I'm not 100% sure, but maybe if your <bun> were /bu:n/ and remained
> /"bu:nti/. If it was short, the short vowel would have been
> preserved as in "hunt" (OE huntian). Lengthening only happened when
> a voiced homorganic stop followed the nasal, as in "blind", or
> "found".
Most likely it was long. It would be short if it came to OE via
Urianian, which at that stage, latter half of the 1st millennium,
would shorten vowels before clusters. But I think the name must have
been known in Britain before that. Which means I should perhaps look
up Jackson to see how it would fare through the British Celtic sound
changes.

Den 20. jun. 2008 kl. 01.11 skreiv Peter Collier:
>
>
> If you have to take i-umlaut into account (not sure when this took
> place, diachronically speaking WRT to "English") -
 From about 450-500 according to Wikipedia, so I would need to take
it into account.

> Beent /bi:nt/
> Bint /bai)nt/ (i.e. rhyming with 'pint', not 'skint')
I guess the latter version is the most probable then. According to
the Wikipedia table it would be Bu:nty -> By:nt. I guess this would
give a modern Bint /bai)nt/ as you say.

I reckon they would append a '-land' at some stage, possibly with a
connecting vowel.

Another route which I should explore as well is via Old Norse,
because Vikings settled on the island before the turn of the
millennium, and the English speakers followed a couple of centuries
after.

LEF