From: Rick McCallister
Message: 61262
Date: 2008-11-02
> From: tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...>yarn < gearn, dialect yate < gate < Norse gata
> Subject: [tied] Re: Scandinavia and the Germanic tribes such as Goths, Vandals, Angli and Saxones.
> To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, November 2, 2008, 2:34 PM
> > . . .
> > >
> > > We don't know much about the Burgundian and
> Vandalic languages;
> > > the idea that they are East Germanic is purely
> geographic. I
> > > don't want to change the meaning of the words
> 'Goth' and 'Jute',
> > > I am just proposing that they were once the same
> word and
> > > designated probably just one tribe.
> > >
>
> > Okay, so you need some kind of ad/sub-strate in
> Juteland to account
> > for /g/ > /y/ --which also presupposes that /u/
> > /ü/ or /yu/.
>
> I'm not so sure that's necessary for Jutland alone.
> As you may have
> seen from the Wikipedia references, 'Jute' and
> similar words designate
> peoples all over the Germanic-speaking area, which is
> usually stitched
> up by claims of migration. Suppose they were all different
> pre-Germanic splinter groups, but once of the same people?
>
> > But once you did have *güt or *giut, you can argue
> that Anglo-Saxon,
> > which originated nextdoor changed gi, ge > /y/.
>
> English does that for yester-day vs. Germ. gestern, yield
> vs. geld,
> but is this regular, or limited to a few words?
> > But if that's so, then Angle or Saxon could fillI'm looking at the word, but the Jutes presumibly spoke something very similar to Anglo-Saxon. Supposedly the Frisians were from what is now Jutland and were driven out by the Danes. Perhaps Jutish was Frisian
> the bill as
> > substrate of Jute.
>
> Not likely. Angles are not documented north of the present
> Angeln.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angles
>
> Besides, I'm not sure I get what you are saying. Are
> you calling
> 'Jute' a language? If so, what affiliation do you
> see for it?
>