Re: [tied] history of Icelandic

> In books about the Icelandic language, it is frequently stated that the
> language has resisted change over the last millennium enough that, without
> special training, those literate in Modern Icelandic can read the Elder

Edda

> in its original language. Is this accurate or an exaggeration?

As far as I know, it is exaggerated, although not excessively. A
colleague of mine is Icelandic, and says he can't understand the stuff at
all. Perhaps you could compare a literate modern English person trying to
read Chaucer.

> If it is accurate, is there a clear explanation of why it has changed so
> little?

The separation of Icelandic from the mainland was important, but here's a
quote with another idea:
"While its Scandinavian congeners have carried reductionism to extremes,
Icelandic remains close to Old Norse. This is partly due to its
geographical position as an outlier. More important, however, and the major
factor in its linguistic conservatism, was the presence in Iceland of the
saga literature of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries."

Peter