Chennechîn est attesté étout dans la littéthatuthe coumme: aupi d'. Ch'est-i' logique dé lister auprès d' sans lister aupid d' étout? Nou trouve étout ôpi d' attesté, mais pouor des raisons étymologiques ch'est d'lister sans doute raîque aupid d'/au pid d', n'est-che pon?
The expression au pid d' isn't listed in the Jèrriais-English/English-Jèrriais dictionaries, although it is buried away in the Dictionnaire Jersiais-Français. We also find literary attestations for the form aupid d' (also as the form ôpi d' - which presumably suggests that to writers in the past the idiom using pid was already opaque). It's quite clear that auprès d' (near, close by) has a standard fused form (instead of au près d'), so it would be logical to list the fused form aupid d' as standard also.
No comments:
Post a Comment