--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
wrote:
I think it's strange
> that Swedes should have colonised Estonia during that time, before
> the Union of Kalmar.
> Possible solutions:
>
> 1) Estonia was colonised by Swedes after 1346
>
> 2) Estonia was colonised very early by Eastern Norse speakers?
>
> 3) The Estonian Swedes were swedified Danish colonists?
>
Perhaps early Eastern Norse speakers at a time when the difference
between Swedish and Danish was insignifant.
Cf.
http://runeberg.org/nfbg/0500.html spalt 951:
Historia. E. har redan under vikingatiden stått i
förbindelse med Skandinavien, och det är troligen från
denna tid den svenska befolkningen på västkusten och
öarna härstammar; något säkert härom är dock icke
kändt.
Danish origin might as well be probable, but only one thing is
really Danish:
Also it seemed d -> zero, g -> zero in inlaut (Danish -> ð, ->
> G, > dialectally -> zero).
Palatalisation is insignifant:
> At what time did palatalisation of velars before front vowels take
> place in Swedish?
Hard /g/ and /k/ can't be taken as criteria for a difference between
Danish and Swedish until late.
The palatalization in Swedish is not going further back than the
17th century judging from king Carl XI's misspellings like 'Sier-
Torsdagen'.
'Stjärna' wasn't /Sän,a/ until around 1800.
Furthermore the same development seems to have been going on in
Kjöbenhavn at this time, but was stopped by anti-German
shibbolethization in the middle of the 19th century. (That I've
learnt by studying this list!)
Complete palatalization is still not in vigour yet in Finland
where 'kära' and 'tjära' is the afficata /tS/.
One thing is definitely Swedish:
in dialect maps the Estonian islands fall within the line of thick l.
Lars