Otto-Friedrich-Universität Bamberg
Lehrstuhl für Englische Sprachwissenschaft einschließlich Sprachgeschichte
Hauptseminar: English Etymology
Master Module (8 ECTS)
Dozentin: Prof. Dr. Gabriele Knappe
Summer Semester 2014

Origin Unknown and the word key

Touhid Ahmed Chowdhury
Matrikelnummer: 1762055
European Joint Master’s Degree in English and American Studies (2)
Pestalozzi Straße 9/C- 3401, 96052 Bamberg
Telefon: 01521 852 5560
Email: noyon.sust@gmail.com
18th August 2014

Table of Contents 1. Introduction ………………………………………… 01 2. Etymology: Origin Unknown ……………………… 02 3. Words with known origin/ undisputed origin ……... 04 4. Theories for Etymology of Origin Unknown ……… 06 5. A case study on word Key ………………………….. 08 6. Conclusion …………………………………………... 12 References
Declaration

1. Introduction
Etymology can be defined as the systematic study of the birth, historical perspective, and time-to-time changes in the forms and implications of words (Ross, 1962). The study of the etymology of the English language words is an interesting and useful area. But, there are many English words in the dictionaries end up with no specific etymology for them. Thousands of words in English etymological dictionaries are included with statement such as ‘of unknown origin’, ‘origin uncertain’, ‘obscure origin’, ‘ulterior etymology unknown’. Numerous studies and research have done on some of these types of words in English etymology. The issue of ‘origin unknown’ words in English etymology incites curiosity of finding an existing and acceptable etymology for them. According to Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (2010), the most of the English words have been derived from other primitive languages such as Latin and Greek. Similarly, many other words are formed by adding prefixes of suffixed. Moreover, many etymological dictionaries states that disputed English words have cognates in all the Germanic languages. This also posed a problem of finding a true etymology for the disputed words on their origin. According to Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology (1966), the word sword has cognates all over the Germanic languages except Gothic and traced to *swerðam, which has a doubtful origin. Thus, despite all the efforts of finding a true and undisputed origin for all English words by etymologists, there are quite a number of words are still of “origin unknown”. This study provides the information about the “origin unknown” words and their etymological analysis. The paper will also discuss about the categories of finding a known etymology for English words. The section ‘Theories for Etymology of origin unknown’ will briefly illustrate the two mostly discussed theories about solving the problem of “origin unknown” in English etymology. Finally in the last part of the paper, etymology of the word key will be discussed in light of the proposed etymology by Liberman (1999-2000) and Vennemann (2002). The main objective of this research is not to come up with a new etymology for the “origin unknown”, rather to find a proper solution for the problem in etymological research. The whole paper will try to come up with a concrete understanding of “origin unknown”/ “obscure origin” in English etymology and to speculate a more reliable solution for these English words.

2. Etymology: Origin Unknown
Etymology is the history of words, their origins, and how their form and meaning have changed over time. More specifically, the term etymology of a word means the origin of the particular word. The etymology of a word refers to its origin and historical development: that is, its earliest known use, its transmission from one language to another, and its changes in form and meaning.
The word etymology is derived from the Greek word ἐτυμολογία, itself from ἔτυμον, meaning "true sense" and the suffix -logia, denoting "the study of".(cf. OED) In modern linguistic research, the term etymology has a number of diverse and overlying uses. In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics Philip Durkin (2006: 261) mentions four several uses of the term etymology: 1. The methodology by which the history and/or prehistory of the lexis of a language may be traced, and/or its affiliations in other languages. (Thus conceived, etymology comprises all applications of the methodology of historical and comparative linguistics as manifested at the level of the lexeme, and it cannot usefully be separated from a general account of the methodology of the discipline.) 2. An account of the history of a word, including all major developments in meaning and form, so far as these can be traced in historical documents or reconstructed from the available evidence, together with an account where appropriate of the word’s affiliations in other languages, or, in the case of a loanword, a similar account of the relevant facts in the word’s history within the donor language(s), and sometimes also the ulterior history of the word within the donor language or beyond. This will often be abbreviated, by restriction to a particular historical period, or by selective presentation of the most significant data. Where there is doubt or uncertainty, rival explanations will normally be summarized and appraised. 3. In the case of a word that is taken to form part of the inherited word stock of a language, this may be a listing of the word’s immediate or remoter cognates (the similarly descended forms in related languages), with or without a reconstructed proto-form. In the case of a loanword, this may amount to no more than the immediate donor form, or even just an indication of the language from which it is borrowed. 4. Any of the competing explanations of a word’s origin or development (e.g., an article in a journal might have the title ‘A new etymology of English boy’). Sometimes more specifically, a suggestion that a word may originate in a particular language or group of languages.
Etymology is also the branch of linguistics which deals with determining the origin of words and the historical development of their form and meanings. According to OED “etymology is normally understood as comprising the investigation of a word's origin, its relationships (if any) with words in other languages and its historical development in both form and meaning” (OED: s.v. etymology). Etymology provides important information about the word history and its formation and development. It also refers to the words history where a proper hypothesis is necessary or where the word has ambiguous historical data (cf. OED).
From historical linguistics points of view an etymology is the history and prehistory of a word; it is sometime regarded as a presentation of evidential sets containing the word in question. An etymology epitomizes orderly correspondences in the course of cognates that confirm an inherent familial relation among languages. More specifically, modern etymology and its study presuppose a satisfactory grasp of the nature of phonological, morphological, syntactic, and semantic change of analogy, borrowing, reconstruction, and internal reconstruction- in fact, an older acceptance of etymology centered on the synchronic derivational relation between words and of areal linguistics. In practical sense, an etymology is a precise citation from selected bundle of morphological and semantic features, from the recognized historical evidences of a set of culturally associated language stages. A good etymology dates all stages and specified all the attested forms too, either through relative chronology or through external evidence or documentation. As an excerpt, a good etymology will mention as many ancestor and related forms and stages as are relevant, and permitted by constraints of space and format. If the total reconstruction cannot be shown, sufficient forms should be supplied to outline and substantiate the argument. As a gist, it can be said that, etymology denotes the origin and historical development of a linguistic form as shown by determining its basic elements, earliest known use, and changes in form and meaning, tracing its transmission from one language to another, identifying its cognates in other languages, and reconstructing its ancestral form where possible. As stated above, etymology exemplifies the history and origin of a word, but there are a huge number of words in English that have no specific or concrete ancestral form. In a survey it is found that “at least 4696 English words” with unknown etymology or obscure origin in OED (Vennemann 2002: 245). So, it is important to define “origin unknown” in English etymology. “Origin unknown” in English etymology is the term that denotes the words in English dictionaries with the statement of ‘obscure history or origin’, ‘the root is not found outside Germanic’, ‘ulterior etymology unknown’ or ‘unknown origin’. But in this point another question arises. Why these words are leveled as ‘unknown origin’? Or how does an etymologist come up with a word leveling as ‘obscure origin’? Consider the word green, which is developed from Old English grēne < *grōnjaz and could be possible to relate with grow and grass. So, it can be stated that green appears to be the color of growth. But “why Germanic *gra-/*grō- suggested growth and why IE *gombhos meant ‘tooth’ will hardly ever be explained” (Liberman 2003: 115). Therefore, the words that have no chronological and compelling historical information are those whose etymology is “unknown”. Words have no established cognates in other languages are also considered as of etymology is “unknown” or “origin unknown”. In a nutshell, it can be stated that words without tangible back history of formation and development are the words of “origin unknown”. These are the words that do not allow a modern linguistic investigator to go a step back in the history of those words. In that note, it could also possible to articulate that no etymology is complete.
3. Words with known origin/ undisputed origin
Though there are a huge number of words in English have disputed or obscure origin, but to understand the words with disputed origin it would be wise to know about the words with known etymology. There are a number of categories suggested by scholars to find a known etymology for a word. If a word fulfills any of the suggested criterions, then the word would be considered having a known etymology. This section of the paper will illustrate the decisive factors of considering a words etymology is known.
3.1. One of the most popular and easiest means of finding origin of a word is to find a relation in sound formation; that of onomatopoeia. Onomatopoeia is the formation of a word from a sound associated with the thing or action being named; the formation of words imitative of sounds. So, if we trace a word to onomatopoeia, then it is quite obvious that we would find the origin of the word. Consider the English word cuckoo that has very strong cognates in other Germanic languages, though the modern English word cuckoo is a borrowing from Old French. Cuckoo stems from the Germanic word *gauk-; which is changed into gēac from *gauk- in Old English because of the palatalization of au > ēa. Furthermore, the second consonant shift of Old High German converts it into gouh. These OE gēac and Old High German gouh resemble kuku(k), which is the sound that believed to be heard from the bird. On the other hand, modern English word cuckoo is traced after Norman Conquest and for this reason it is also considered that it is a borrowing from Old French cuccu. In the time of its borrowing, “the first [u] in cuccu became [ʌ], around 18th century [′kʌku:] was replaced with [′kuku:],” which has sounded more like the cry of the bird (cf. Liberman 2003: 112).
3.2. Many English word has formed from proper names. Finding etymology for these words are very easy and their etymology resemble only the formation of the word (cf. Liberman 2003: 113). For example: Shakespearean originated from Shakespeare, Machiavellian from Machiavelli, milliner from Milan and sandwich from the name of the town of Sandwich, Kent etc. Thus, origin of the words with trace back in proper names can easily be found.
3.3. Disguised compounds are the words whose origin can be identified strongly. Compounds are those words which are formed by combining two or more lexemes. Compounds pose fewer problems, especially those of the roommate or cornflakes type. Room, mate, corn, and flakes are conventional signs to us, we don’t know why they mean what they do, whether they are native or borrowed and how long they have existed in the language, but their sum is clear: room + mate, corn + flakes. Some more examples of disguised compounds are bonfire (bone + fire), daisy (day’s eye) and woman (wīfman) etc.
3.4. Back formation is another category to identifying undisputed origin of a word. Back formation is the process of creating a new word by removing actual or supposed affixes from another word; shortened words created from longer words. Examples of back formation words are sculpt from sculpture, diagnose from diagnosis, edit from editor etc. It poses no problems to trace the source of a words formation, if the word is a back formation word. The origin of the word can be traced by going back to main source word of the back formation word.
3.5. Clipping is the category which also leads an etymology to a stage of absolute origin of the word. Clipping is the word formation process that shortened a word without changing its meaning. It differs from back formation in that the new word retains the meaning of the original word. Clippings causes less problem on finding the origin of the word, especially the new word retains the same meaning of the original word. Some of the examples of clippings are – flu from influenza, ad from advertisement, gator from alligator, gas from gasoline, exam from examination etc.
3.6. Early blending of words also helps to find etymology of the word. Blend is word formation process by merging the sounds and meanings of two or more other words or word parts, also known as a portmanteau word. These are the words whose origin has not yet been forgotten – motel (motor+hotel), docudrama (document+dram), brunch (breakfast+lunch), clash (clap+crash), sitcom (situation+comedy) etc.
3.7. Proven loanwords or borrowings also lead to a concrete origin of a word. English as a language has been immensely influenced and adopted many foreign words from different cultural contact. It is solely depends on our evaluation of borrowings and how far do we want to go for a words etymology. A loan word may have an obscure origin in its native language, but as far as English etymological concern it is known. Some of the loan words in English are orange is from French, vigilante is from Spanish, yacht is from Dutch, and umbrella is from Italian etc.
3.8. If a word form by derivational morphology then it is easy to reach the origin of that word. Derivational forming of words includes suffixing and affixing with the main word to form a new word. We do not know why it means what it does, but we know where it comes from and how it developed into this form: slowness (slow+ness), redish (red+ish), and writer (write+er) etc. The above mentioned categories formulate the process of finding origin of a word and reaching to “a stage at which the sound complex before us stops being absolutely conventional” (Liberman 2003: 114).
4. Theories for Etymology of Origin Unknown
To resolve the problem of unknown etymology in English language, both Anatoly Liberman and Theo Vennemann proposes theories. This part of the paper will precisely introduce the theories. Liberman proposes a Germanic etymology for the problem. He suggests that words without a definite origin “may have a cognate or two in Germanic or cognates in and outside the Germanic group” (Liberman 2003: 116). His line of argument is that the Germanic cognates will give enough instances and variety to go a step back in the history of those words. As he states finding a cognate in Germanic group will make the etymology of that word clearer and gives a chance to come up with a known etymology for the word. This also gives a chance to dictionaries to replace the etymology of a word into cognates which they are inclined to. As OED gives a long list of cognates for the word bride: Old English brȳd; Old Frisian brēd, breid, breyd; Old Saxon brūd; Old High German brut; Old Icelandic brūðr; and Gothic brūϸs; all these cognates meaning same ‘bride’ and all these words stems from Germanic *brūðiz. He also suggests that “a non-onomatopoeic native word to possess a recoverable etymology, it has to be derivative either at the level of word formation (daisy = dæges eage, quixotic = Quixote + ic) or at the semantic level (bunkum from Bunkum, green from grow, otter from water)” (Liberman 2003: 117). Finally, Liberman (2003: 119) makes a statement quoting about the golden rule of etymology that “one should never explain obscurum per obsurius”. That every etymology is incomplete and there is no ultimate end of the words etymology. Theo Vennemann (2002: 227) offers two major sources for new or better English etymologies for the “origin unknown” words. He goes back to prehistoric time stating that “English and its ancestral languages did not begin in historical times, […] but in prehistoric times” (Vennemann 2002: 227). He argues that unetymologized English words have the influence from prehistoric languages (a) Vasconic languages and (b) Semitidic languages. Etymology of the ‘obscure origin’ can be traced to these two languages through comparing the vowel shifts and word sets. The comparison between English words to Vasconic and Semitidic languages also showcase the cultural relationships between English on one hand and Basque and Semitic on the other. Vennemann (2002: 244) maps a genealogical tree for English also:

Atlantic Italic
(Semitic) (Latin, Romance) ↓ ↓ Proto-Indo-European ➙ West-Indo-European ➙ Germanic ➙ English (Pre-Germanic) (Anglo-Saxon) ↑ Celtic ➙ Insular Celtic Old European ↑ (Vasconic) Atlantic (Semitic)

Two theories of resolving the problem of ‘unknown etymology’ in English etymology are proposed from two different points of view. Liberman tries to solve the problem from within the IE or Germanic language group, while Vennemann look for the solution by expanding the horizon to prehistoric time. In case of consistency and acceptance, Liberman’s theory is more convenient to research in.

5. A case study on word Key
The theories on ‘origin unknown’ or ‘disputed origin’ or ‘unknown etymology’ or ‘obscure origin’ of English words will be tested by examining the etymology of Modern English key (Middle English kay, Old English cǽʒ, f, cǽʒe f, cǽʒa), which presents a number of challenges to finding a definite conclusion about the origin of the word. It is not the purpose of this section of the paper to offer a new etymology for key. Instead, this chapter will examine the two recently proposed etymologies for key, those of Liberman (1999-2000) and Vennemann (2002), and then use those proposals as facilitators for generalizing and opening up a plausible solution to the issue of “origin unknown” in English etymology.
The word key arises three strong issues to deal with, they are: (1) key does not have a similar words with same corresponding meaning in the other Germanic languages, e.g. German Schlüssel, Dutch sloetel, Swedish nyckel, etc. As Markey (1979: 41) states that the other Germanic words for ‘key’ are “formed as diminutives to verbs expressing closure, i.e. ‘the (small) object which effects closure’,” but the same analysis is not possible for English word key. In addition, (2) the pronunciation of modern English key is unusual, as it sounds like the words see, fee, etc. and not rhyming with way, day, etc., since Old English -ǽʒ usually turns to Modern English -ēi(Markey 1979: 41). Finally, (3) the word occurs only in English and Frisian (Old Frisian kei, kay, Modern Frisian kaai) and does not appear into other Germanic languages.
In general, the etymologies of key existing in the dictionaries are not satisfying wholly. The relevant entry in the OED states “O[ld]E[nglish] cǣʒ str. f. (pl. с cǣʒa) and cǣʒe wk. f. (pl. cǣʒan) = O[ld]Fris[an]. kei, kay, not found in the other Teut[onic] languages; ulterior etym. unknown. The mod[ern] pronunciation is abnormal...” (OED: s.v. key). Holthausen (1974: s.v. cǣg(e)) is also not very helpful, stating that “cǣg(e ) f. Schlüssel; Lösung, ne. key, afr. kai, kei, mnd. keie.” These etymologies nicely illustrate the problems just cited: key differs sharply from the other Germanic words with the same meaning, as shown by the lack of references to the words in Dutch, German, and the Scandinavian languages, the modern pronunciation is not what one would expect, and the word is securely attested only in Anglo-Frisian.
These problems are not that difficult to resolve. The first two can be resolved in a fairly straightforward manner and these problems have been resolved in scholarly literature too: speakers of Old English and Old Frisian happened to choose a different way to form the word than speakers of German, Dutch, and Swedish did, and the OED entry on key suggests that the aberrant pronunciation is “of northern origin,” even though “it is difficult to know how it came into general English use” (OED: s.v. key). The third problem, however, has caused some controversies over the years. Let us turn to two recent proposals intended to resolve this third problem.
Liberman (1999-2000: 144) outlines English key to “a Scandinavian root *kaig- ‘crooked, twisted, bent, oblique’, which alternated with *kaif-, *kaik-, and probably *kaip.” A number of forms were created based on this root, and one of these forms was borrowed into “northern English and Frisian dialects, as evidenced by the modern dialectal adjective key ‘left’” (Liberman 1999-2000: 144). Another borrowing from the same cluster of words, namely *kaigjō, which Liberman (1999-2000: 144) characterizes as a “local designation of a primitive device for fastening the door (a stick with its end turned down or bent),” was also loaned into English and Frisian dialects, early enough, in fact, to undergo a number of sound changes, including i-umlaut and monophthongization of ai. Because it was a loan word, “it never acquired one standard form” (Liberman 1999-2000: 144), leading to its various attestations as a strong feminine, a weak feminine, and a weak masculine (cf. the OED entry cited above). Thus, Liberman has proposed a Germanic etymology for this troublesome word.
Vennemann (2002), on the other hand, looks to a non-Indo-European origin for this word. Vennemann argues that Germanic words meaning ‘hook’, e.g. Old Norse haki, Old High German hac, hâco, hâgo, Old English haca, hòc, German Haken, English hook, among others, are loan words: the ‘hook’ set occurs only in Germanic, not in the other Indo-European language families, and the vocalism is variable. In Vennemann’s view, this is because the hook words stem from “a Vasconic loan complex” (Vennemann 2002: 233), e.g. Basque kako, kakho ‘hook’. The hook words were borrowed from Vasconic into Germanic before the First Sound Shift (Grimm's Law), since otherwise the initial [k] of the Basque word would have been preserved, and not changed to [h]. The Anglo-Frisian key words are later and direct borrowings of the same word from Vasconic, and, in Vennemann’s view, go back to a proto-form *kāgō, from “an early pre-Anglo-Frisian stage” (Vennemann 2002: 233). As for the semantic difference between the Basque and English words, Vennemann (2002: 234) argues that:
… before the advent of the modern pin-tumbler lock ... the typical key was hook- shaped, and many ordinary household keys still are.... The oldest keys found by archaeologists likewise had the shape of a hook.... To the extent that keys were used in prehistoric times, they were undoubtedly likewise hook-shaped. ...
In addition, as Vennemann notes, Basque gako, gakho ‘key’ shows the same shift in meaning proposed for the Anglo-Frisian forms, suggesting that the different meaning in Anglo-Frisian is unproblematic.
Now, it is high time to evaluate both these two theories about the disputed origin of the word key. Liberman’s etymology is fully plausible and convincing, and does not require loan relationships between language families to work. Its reliance on contact between North and West Germanic is unproblematic, given the solid evidence documenting such contacts. On the other hand, Vennemann’ s suggestion is phonologically problematic, which severely detracts from its value. Trask (1997: 128) points out that “the evidence for word-initial k in Pre-Basque is scanty and doubtful,” and later states that “[v]irtually no native Basque lexical item of any antiquity can begin with k-” (Trask 1997: 360). Basque lexical items beginning with [k] are normally loan words, generally from Romance. Therefore, Basque kako/ kakho is simply too new to be the source of the Anglo-Frisian words for key, let alone the hook words, which were putatively borrowed earlier. In addition to the phonological problems with the Basque data, Vennemann’s proposed proto-form *kāgō is also problematic. Bammesberger (2004) convincingly demolishes the evidence for this proto-form, noting, among other things, that (1) the initial k should have been palatalized in Pre-Old English, (2) West Germanic *ā should appear in Old English as <e>, not <a>, (3) West Germanic *kāg- does not result in Frisian kei/kai, because the vowel should be raised to e and the initial consonant should be palatalized. Since Vennemann’s proposed etymology is problematic from both the Vasconic and Germanic ends, it seems that it cannot be sustained.
Now, if Vennemann’s claims about the sources of many ‘unknown origin’ words without Indo-European etymologies are correct, do they lead to better etymologies of Germanic words with Indo-European etymologies? In this particular instance, the answer is clearly ‘no’, because of the severe phonological difficulties faced by Vennemann’s proposal. What is perhaps not so clear, however, is whether this decision can be generalized (i.e. are native etymologies always preferable to loan etymologies?). The answer here is also clearly ‘no’. This point can be trivially illustrated by reference to a well-known loan word like English tobacco. Any proposed etymology involving anything other than a loan relationship simply cannot be correct, as tobacco is a New World product not indigenous to the Old World, and hence reconstructing a Proto-Germanic form, say, on the basis of English tobacco, German Tabak , and Swedish tobak, is clearly misguided. Cases like key, however, are more subtle, as there are definite indications that key could in fact be a loan word, as it occurred only in English and Frisian, and its general deviance from the other Germanic words for ‘key’, and thus an etymology relying on loan relationships cannot be immediately discounted. The most appropriate conclusion to draw here is therefore that loan etymologies cannot be rejected on principle, but only after careful examination of all the relevant data, and also that such etymologies must be carefully constructed as well, so that they cannot be dismantled on readily apparent phonological, morphological, or semantic grounds, as was the case with the proposed Vasconic etymology discussed here.
Finally, whichever proposal for ‘origin unknown’ words have employed and succeed in historical linguistic, these proposals will certainly led to increased discussion of the issue and renewed attention to long-accepted dogmas. And for that, both Liberman and Vennemann should be praised for their work and research. Though, Vennemann’s theory of prehistoric loan from Vasconic or Smitidic languages has arose stark criticism and controversy in finding a concrete etymology for words with ‘unknown etymology’, but it has opened up a new arena for linguistic research on etymological problems. On the other hand, Libermann’s theory about the ‘origin unknown’ suggests more easy and less problematic solution for the problem by restricting the research within the same language family.

6. Conclusion
Knowing about the etymology of the English words is a valuable asset for language learners and users. Etymology is a part of historical linguistic that deals with the origin of a word. It also illustrates all the existing examples of the development of a word from its first appearance in any given language, in this case in English. However, there are lots of words in English without a good or accurate etymology; and the words without a proper etymology are known as “origin unknown” words. In English etymology, there have been a lot of works on other aspects of etymology then on words “of unknown origin”. I have tried to focus on defining “origin unknown” in this paper; and also give some solid idea about the issue of unknown origin in English etymology by discussing about the proposed solutions of Liberman and Vennemann. It is appeared strongly that it is necessary to address the problem of unknown etymology in English and to have a more detailed English etymological dictionary; that is a dictionary that critically assesses all the presented literature relevant to the origin and history of English words. As Vennemann (2002: 245) states,
[…] at least 4,996 English words are in need of a better etymology, or any etymology at all. Even if some of these words have been given better etymologies since the OED was composed, this may be more than compensated by the number of words whose recorded etymologies are no longer generally accepted. […] But it should also be evident that there is work to do, and that it will be a long way until the goal of a complete etymology of the English language is reached. The works of Liberman (1999-2000, 2003) and Vennemann (2002) has taken a step further in identifying and clarifying the problem of English etymology from different lines of argument. But whatever line of argument they have, both of them go for a common goal of producing a stringent and tangible new etymology for “origin unknown” English words. It is appeared from the present study of their suggested solutions for the unknown etymology of English words that in couple of decades we would have a better etymology for all the disputed words. I also hope, this paper will also lead us a step forward to the direction of having a well documented English etymological dictionary.

Words: 4,830

References
Bammesberger, Alfred (2004): “Old English cǣģ ‘key’ and Frisian kei/kai”. Northwestern European Language Evolution. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 44: 91-100.
Durkin, Philip. 2006. “Etymology”. In: Keith Brown, ed. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. 2nd ed. 14 vols. Oxford: Elsevier. IV: 260-267.
Holthausen, Ferdinand (1974): Altenglisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Dritte, unveränderte Auflage. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag.
Liberman, Anatoly (1999-2000): “The Etymology of the English Word key”. Rivista Italianadi Linguistica e di Dialettologia. Rome: Fabrizio Serra editore. I-II: 135- 148. [Appeared in 2001]
Liberman, Anatoly. 2003. "Origin Unknown". In: Donka Minkova (ed.). Studies in the History of the English Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 109-123.
Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. 2010- Fourth ed. Jack C. Richards, Richard W. Schmidt. London: Routledge.
Markey, Thomas L. (1979) Nfr. kūch , Engl, ‘key’, and the Unshifted Consonant Question. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. XL VI: 41-55.
ODEE = The Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology. 1966. Charles T. Onions, ed. with the assistance of G.W.S. Friedrichsen and Robert W. Burchfield. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
OED = The Oxford English Dictionary. 2000- Third ed. online. First edition: 1933. James A.H. Murray, H. Bradley, W.A. Craigie & C.T. Onions, eds. Supplement. 1972- 1986. R.W. Burchfield, R.W.,ed. 2nd edition 1989. J.A. Simpson, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trask. R.L. 1997. The History of Basque. London: Routledge.
Vennemann, Theo. 2002. "Key issues in English Etymology". In: Theresa Fanego, B. Méndez-Naya, and E. Seone (eds.). Sounds, Words, Texts and Change: Selected Papers from 11 ECEHL, Santiago de Compostela, September 7-11, 2000. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 227-252.
Erklärung
Ich erkläre hiermit gemäß § 19 Abs. 2 APO, dass ich die vorstehende Seminararbeit selbständig verfasst und keine anderen als die angegebenen Quellen und Hilfsmittel benutzt wurden, dass Zitate kenntlich gemacht sind und die Arbeit noch in keinem anderen Prüfungsverfahren vorgelegt wurde.
Ich erkläre hiermit außerdem, dass ich per e-Mail eine elektronische Version der Seminararbeit an meine Dozentin/meinen Dozenten geschickt habe.

Declaration
I hereby declare according to § 19 para. 2 APO that this term paper is the result of my own independent scholarly work and that in all cases material from the work of others is acknowledged. Quotations and paraphrases are clearly indicated and no material other than listed has been used. This written work has not been submitted for academic critical elsewhere.
I hereby also declare to have e-mailed my lecturer an electronic version of my term paper. Bamberg, 18.08.2014 Touhid Ahmed Chowdhury
_________________________________ __________________________________
Ort, Datum (place, date) Unterschrift (signature)