From: tgpedersen
Message: 41297
Date: 2005-10-12
>Danish
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Andrew Jarrette <anjarrette@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > I wonder also whether "steg" meaning "steak" has a different
> pronunciation than "eg", even though they both go back to Old
> e:k and ste:k, because "steg" is also the spelling of the wordpronunciation
> for "step", and the one spelling came to have only one
> rather than two (the pronunciation of the one with -g in OldDanish
> instead of the one with -k, being chosen). I must confess I amand
> assuming that Lars is correct about the meaning "step", and I am
> assuming the forms e:k and ste:k for Old Danish -- were they eik
> steik or something similar?("trin"
> > Similarly, "boeg" (I can't yet get the foreign characters) comes
> from *bo:kiz while "loeg" comes from *laukam, do they not? Any
> chance that that could be the reason for the divergent
> pronunciations?
> >
>
> First an auto-correction: there is no noun "steg" in Danish
> is "a step upwards", "skridt" a "step horizontally"). There is theínfluence).
> preterite of "stige", "steg", which I suspect is homophonical
> to "steak".
>
> Secondly, I doubt that we can go very far back in searching for
> differences of pronunciation in Danish homographs. We have my
> dialect, Scanian, which was cut off from the state of Denmark in
> 1658. Both "eg" and "steg" in this dialect are homophones.
> The same should be valid for "bög" and "lög" (there are some
> complications in the use of the first word due to Swedish
>and "stek".
> In Swedish however the result for this pair of words is different:
> "bok" and "lök".
> For the other pair the Swedish correspondencies are: "ek"
>The reason I heard is that 'e:G', 'bø:G' are 19th century
> But, as said, some inner-Danish synergies of dia- and sociolects
> must have been at work since 1658.
>