Re: The w-/n-/m- alternation

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...> wrote:

>
> At 7:01:23 PM on Wednesday, December 17, 2008, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott"
> > <BMScott@> wrote:
>
> >> At 3:54:43 PM on Wednesday, December 17, 2008, tgpedersen
> >> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >>> So 'woos' occurs in Danish too, which it shouldn't.
>
> >> Danish is exactly where its appearance *isn't*
> >> particularly surprising, considering the MLG form.
>
> > Danish hasn't loaned more Low German words than the other
> > Scandinavian languages.
>
> (I presume that you mean 'borrowed'.) I wasn't thinking of
> lexical borrowing, but rather of contact-induced variation
> in pronunciation, possibly starting quite early.

It would come down to the same thing, namely a claim ON /o:/ > ODa
/wo/, but no ON /o:/ > OSw /wo/, and the test for that is the existing
facts on the ground. As I said, beside the Jysk data (the only word I
get think of is the PN Da. Ole, Jysk Wolle), there are no signs of ON
o: > ODa. /wo/ elsewhere. And the Low German speaker presence was not
stronger in Jutland that elsewhere in Denmark, remember that Low
German was a trade language in the Baltic.


Torsten