> No need now for anyone to answer my question about the origin of the
> /j/ in the Scandinavian names for the Jutes, or the forms <Jylland>
> or <Jysk> (although why do these have <y>?), I hadn't seen this
> message when I asked it.
The standard explanation for Danish is that [ju] > [y] (/ju/ > /ü/)
(cf. Sw. djur, Da. dyr "animal") with a few exceptions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Djursland
except before /l/ (hjul "wheel", but Jysk hywl), except in the word
Jylland ([y] by analogy from Jysk, that again with umlaut?), cf also
Da. syv /süU/ (not **sy), Sw. sju "seven". But you still find
archaizing Da. 'sjunge' (for synge, cf. Sw. sjunga) in hymns as late
as the 19th cent.
In contrast, personally I think the [ju] > [y] thing in Danish
happened as a result of a regularization of the paradigm of class II
strong verbs (original ju - y/ju - ö - u becoming Da. y - y - ö - u/y,
Sw. ju - ju - ö/jö - ju), by mutual contrast, and that it spread from
there by a type of hypercorrection, see
http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/Shibbolethisation.html
Torsten