Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Digest Number 210

Expand Messages
  • Bertil Haggman
    Ingemar, Was almost suspecting you would know Professor Nielsen. I was very impressed by his latest, _Guldhornsindskriften fra Gallehus - Runer, sprog og
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 7, 2002

      Was almost suspecting you would know Professor Nielsen.
      I was very impressed by his latest, _Guldhornsindskriften fra
      Gallehus - Runer, sprog og politik_ published this year by Odense University
      Press. Was on a visit to the National Museum in Copenhagen
      when I discovered it ib the bookshop.

      It made me an instant convert to his theory, that is,
      he wrote, a theory inspired by Hans Kuhn.

      Nielsen is also pointing to the fact that we have 200 authentic early
      runic inscriptions. He prefers Early Runic to "urnordisk" (orginal
      nordic) and also here he has in my view a point.

      For those who want to pursue the ideas of Professor Nielsen
      perhaps _The Early Runic Language in Scandinavia. Studies in
      Germanic Dialect Geography_ (2000) is a good start.

      The Gallehus Horns in gold are fascinating with the Runic inscription
      ek hlewgastiR holtijaR horna tawido (I, Laegaest, son of Holte, made
      the horn). In Gothic it would according to Nielsen be *ik hliugasts hulteis haurn
      tawida. One can of course speculate in the relation between Gothic
      anf Early Runic based on the similarities.

      The Gallehus horns were found in 1802 in southern Denmark (Toender) on
      the Jutland Peninsula. My wish would be that this list could devote more
      to the European era 500 BC - 600 AD, which is a fascinating period including the
      Germanic migrations.



      > I have discussed a lot the question of the proposed origin in Nort West
      > Germanic of the Nordic languages as separated from Eastgermanic with
      > Hans Frede. He is a close friend having helped me a lot with language
      > problems when writing my dissertation. He and Ottar Grønvik, also a dear
      > discussion combattant, belong to the late modern school but there still
      > are a lot of linguists denying the Nordic started with Nort-West
      > Germanic. They mean the scheme should be
      > 1. Protogermanic
      > 2. Northgermanic
      > Eastgermanic
      > Westgermanic
      > They see similarities between North- and East-Germanic and sometimes
      > speak of North-East Germanic. Ernst Schwarz adds a Gotho-Nordic stage.
      > Personally I am convinced that the split in dialects was completed as
      > latest in the 4-5 c. AD. This at least if you look to the runic stones
      > but of course this might, with Makaev, be a special coiné. The process
      > might have begun already around AD and been gradual. As I see it Nordic
      > is North-Germanic and not Northwest-Germanic in stage 2 and closer to
      > East-Germanic. Hans Frede does not deny this possibility but he prefers
      > the newer interpretation.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.