--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "akoddsson" <konrad_oddsson@...>
wrote:

> the word 'land' (sg. ME land) could theoretically be written with
> either a-rune (as indeed it was). The problem here is that short-
> vowels can also occur nasalized, as implied in the First Grammatical
> Treatise, _but_ they do not occur without the nasal consonant being
> preserved (compare 'land' above, where -n- is preserved), leaving no
> compelling reason to select to áss-rune over the ár-rune in writing.

Can we assume then that, as far as the First Grammarian was concerned,
(short) nasal vowels didn't occur in unstressed positions--e.g.
infinitives, 3rd person plural, n-stem nouns and adjectives--except
where the nasal consonant was preserved? Even though they may have
survived much longer in part of Sweden...

Another nasal curiosity: the First Grammatical Treatise contrasts the
long oral vowel of 'sýna' (gen.pl. of sýja "lap [of boards on ship]")
with nasal 'sy~na' "show". Einar Haugen interpreted this as
demonstrating that "the nasalisation due to a following consonant did
not work across a morpheme bourndary". But I don't understand how
this can apply to 'brýnna' "sharper" (breeze) as against 'bry.nna' "to
water" (cattle); 'ru.nar' "boars" versus 'rúnar' "letters". Each of
these last two examples is marked with a dot over the vowel are given
in dictionaries (Fritzner, Cleasby-Vigfusson, Zoega) as short, inf.
brynna, nominative sg. runi.

Llama Nom