whence final –e in the masc. nom sg.? I think it’s a –ja/jo- adjective (because of i umlaut), which in Germ. had that Sievers’ Law change whereby [j] after a long syllable was syllabified to [ij]; later the endings and the a/o theme were lost leaving long [i:], which either occurred after Germanic shortening of long vowels, or was protected by the circumflex accent. In early OE times it was shortened and lowered to –e., ie after High Vowel Deletion of i and u., which Campbell describes as Prim OE. But OED doesn’t reconstruct a Germanic etymon, so not sure. see Campbell §355.3, 398.4 but can’t yet understand Campbell §576 p.229 about nom and acc of secg and cynn not being the historical form.-- I think it’s that by the time of WGG, there was [i] not [j]. In *segjaz, first [a] was lost, so that j was syllabified to [i]; hence no WGG. see Campbell §400. Then z was lost in WG. Next need to explain would have remained. HVD came whence final –e in the masc. nom sg.? I think it’s a –ja/jo- adjective (because of i umlaut), which in Germ. had that Sievers’ Law change whereby [j] after a long syllable was syllabified to [ij]; later the endings and the a/o theme were lost leaving long [i:], which either occurred after Germanic shortening of long vowels, or was protected by the circumflex accent. In early OE times it was shortened and lowered to –e., ie after High Vowel Deletion of i and u., which Campbell describes as Prim OE. But OED doesn’t reconstruct a Germanic etymon, so not sure. see Campbell §355.3, 398.4 but can’t yet understand Campbell §576 p.229 about nom and acc of secg and cynn not being the historical form.-- I think it’s that by the time of WGG, there was [i] not [j]. In *segjaz, first [a] was lost, so that j was syllabified to [i]; hence no WGG. see Campbell §400. Then z was lost in WG. Next need to explain would have remained. HVD came whence final –e in the masc. nom sg.? I think it’s a –ja/jo- adjective (because of i umlaut), which in Germ. had that Sievers’ Law change whereby [j] after a long syllable was syllabified to [ij]; later the endings and the a/o theme were lost leaving long [i:], which either occurred after Germanic shortening of long vowels, or was protected by the circumflex accent. In early OE times it was shortened and lowered to –e., ie after High Vowel Deletion of i and u., which Campbell describes as Prim OE. But OED doesn’t reconstruct a Germanic etymon, so not sure. see Campbell §355.3, 398.4 but can’t yet understand Campbell §576 p.229 about nom and acc of secg and cynn not being the historical form.-- I think it’s that by the time of WGG, there was [i] not [j]. In *segjaz, first [a] was lost, so that j was syllabified to [i]; hence no WGG. see Campbell §400. Then z was lost in WG. Next need to explain would have remained. HVD came