Re: Language - Area - Routes

From: tgpedersen@...
Message: 5897
Date: 2001-02-02

--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: tgpedersen@...
> To: cybalist@...
> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 11:28 AM
> Subject: [tied] Re: Language - Area - Routes
>
>
> >> I doubt if a clear division line existed at all before the late
fifth century; more likely, there was a dialectal continuum extending
from northern Germany to coastal Scandinavia, with "North Sea"
and "West Sea" influences interpenetrating.
>
> > Not necessarily a continuum. If trafic is by sea, you must take
account of the harborless and dangerous stretch of West Jutland coast
(Esbjerg and Hanstholm are recent and artificial). West Jutland,
because of poor soil, was almost empty until 150 years ago.
>
> The North Sea approach is indeed difficult, but here continuity
existed on land, with a network of similar dialects reaching down the
neck of Jutland into Mecklenburg, Lower Saxony and Frisia.

And where, pray tell, is the evidence for that?

>What I'm arguing for is simply the non-existence of a sharp division
between West and North Germanic until rather recently (the 5th
century at the earliest).

'Positing' cf. last comment, would be more appropriate than 'arguing
for'.
>
> > The Jutes were never "superseded". West Jutish dialects have w
(vs. v), hw- (vs. v), "thick" l (as in English) and trilled r (vs.
uvular). Final schwa disappears. They have one gender (vs. two). What
you say is all textbook stuff, dreamed up by English and German
linguists. I can't blame you for that, of course.
>
> No real disagreement here, just a question of wording and emphasis.
I just mean that a language shift took place. Jutish did not survive
in Jutland as a distinct language, but the remaining Jutish
population was absorbed rather than driven out or exterminated, so
their dialectal traits are recognisable as a substrate in the
regional variety of Danish. It was rather like the linguistic
absorption of Danelaw in England.
'Question of wording and emphasis'. I agree with you there.
>
> > A sudden conversion! I'm shocked but pleased.
>
> No conversion, just a clarification of my views lest you should
think I'm automatically hostile to whatever you say :)
Why would I believe that? :)

>
> > Either way, I suspect the dialect gap between North and West
Germanic has more to do with the expansion of the Slavs into Holstein
(Wagrien, Obodrites).
>
> I think the expansion of the Danes was an important factor in the
emergence of the divide, but of course the appearance of the Polabian
Slavs in the sixth century happened just at the right time to
perpetuate it by creating an ethnic barrier between the Danes and the
Saxons (and other "Ingveonic" tribes). Both events contributed to the
separation.

You are presupposing what you set out to prove. Where is your
evidence for "expansion of the Danes"?
It is true that there have been found the remains of bog sacrifice of
weapons from many battles at that time, but from that to concluding
that an invasion had succeeded, there is a long jump.


> > So, next step in my reasoning is this: If you have a boatload of
something that will get a good price in the Black
Sea/Mediterranean "Raum" (as the Germans call it; unfortunately there
is no good English equivalent expression for "area well connected
internally by routes and less so externally") and your boat has no
keel and is no
> deeper in the water than you can reach the river Tanew, would you
then sell your wares on the local market (there are always markets on
transfer points, most cities started out as a fenced market at a
harbor or a crossroads) or would you try to drag your ship across to
> the other, southwards river system? It can be done by means of
horses and rollers, they tried it here some years ago.
>
> Yes, there were regular trade contacts between the northern seas
and the Mediterranean/Pontic region at least as early as the North
European Bronze Age. Major rivers like the Elbe, the Oder and the
Vistula would have taken an enterprising trader to "transit points"
between navigable river systems. Of course in order to make an long-
distance trading expedition worth the risk you must have something
that will sell really well on a distant foreign market (amber, furs,
slaves, etc.).
>
> I'll tell you more: well before you joined this list the IE
homeland controversy had been discussed here. The hypothesis that I
defended in those debates was that the first IEs should be identified
with the Neolithic cultures of the Middle Danube basin. My view is
that they were typical riverside-dwellers and skilful boaters rather
than steppe vaqueros, and that they used rivers and their valleys as
entry routes into Northern Europe and as cultural communication
lines. We also discussed the Vistula-Dniester "conveyor belt" (Mark
Odegard's term), which provides easy access from the North European
Plain into the Pontic region, also by boat.
I know, since I have searched the list. Did you also discuss how they
managed to keep the *d-n- etc people from spreading into the Baltic
river systems all those thousands of years ;-)


>
> But here's the chronology: the Danubian Neolithic-carriers expanded
about 5500 BC. The first Neolithic culture of Jutland and Scandinavia
emerged ca. 4300 BC. We are talking of a period that is still far
remote in time from the drowning of Sundaland. I see no need to trace
back all traditions that have to do with water and boats to a single
source. What's so special about the Sundaland flood? If you want to
study the impact of natural disasters on human culture, there were
quite impressive and better-timed floods much closer to home; the
most famous one is the Black Sea event about the middle of the sixth
millennium BC.

I know. Why do think I'm so occupied with finding a connection
between the Danes and the *d-n- of the Mediterranean?
I know that we have a perfectly good flood in our own IE territory
and I know I am a terrible ungrateful person to find other people's
floods interesting. Put it down to my sea genes.
Besides I read somewhere that the Euxine flooding was not local, but
caused by the latest rise in sea level. This meand Sundaland and
Euxine occurred simultanéously (now I can't find it, of course).

I would have thought Amazon was much faster - haven't you got the
book yet?

>
> Piotr

Torsten