Talk:fornim
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Metaknowledge in topic RFV discussion: July–November 2016
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.
@Leasnam Was this ever used in modern English (after 1500)? DTLHS (talk) 02:48, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- I cannot find any Modern uses, no. 1413 - 1430 looks to be the extent in the written record. Leasnam (talk) 03:32, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- It's definitely not something dialectal. The latest mention I have got is (the spelling is modernized)ː" And ye, that might have been my leech, have me fornom tongue and speech" [1]. It is from about 1430. So I would not call it Modern English. In the later version, from 1456[2], the verb formin is replaced by the verb reave which leads me to believe that it was "obsolete" even then.
- Compare the two versionsː
- And ye, that might have been my leech, have me fornom tongue and speech (1430)
- And ye, that might have been my leech, have reft from me (the) tongue and speech (1456)
- So, in my aught, no it does not really pass muster as Modern English by about 20 to 50 years. And by the bye, I consider most of the stuff that made it past 1450 Modern English. Mountebank1 (talk) 04:22, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- Possibly. Were it not obsolete it was certainly archaic (--some older folks may have likely still had some familiarity with the term). In any event, let's move the entry to Middle English Leasnam (talk) 14:46, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- English L2 RFV failed and converted to Middle English. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:41, 29 November 2016 (UTC)