At 12:12 25.1.2001 -0800, you wrote:
>Well, some reconstructions sound more ridiculous than others, but the
>problems I have with the attempts at using any reconstructed pronounciation
>are that we simply cannot be certain of its accuracy, and that this means
>any scholar can use a slightly different set of rules to pronounce the
>language according to their theories of reconstruction.
I am in perfect agreement (if I haven't misinterpreted your words).
Such backward reconstructions are always shaky, and since they are
also "academic", it goes without saying that we will have a group
of academics, who wildly disagree with one another on the reconstruction!
Fortunately, most sensible academics simply disregard this question of
"the correct sound" of Old Norse. It's a pretty fishy concept, and a
perfectly useless one anyway. I went through the same dilemma, when I
was studying Ancient Greek. I spent MONTHS reading about it, only to
realize that NOBODY knows EXACTLY how Ancient Greek was pronounced, and
that it DOESN'T MATTER AT ALL!
Eysteinn