Talk:Germanic languages

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

King[edit]

'King' and its cognates are common Germanic words, should we add those to the table?Cameron Nedland 14:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's sort of hit-and-miss. There are probably hundreds of more words we could add, so I wouldn't bother much adding more, but as long as cognates are found in most languages, I would probably not remove any examples. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 23:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do we know they are Common Germanic? Forms appear in West Germanic and North Germanic but not in East Germanic. Which could mean that it is Common Germanic, but East Germanic has lost the word, or that it is either West Germanic or North Germanic, and has since spread from the one to the other, and since been assimilated to ordinary words of the respective branch in the other. Jacob Haller 23:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's most probably CG, just that they haven't been attested in Gothic or were lost before Gothic evolved. Gothic would likely have had many words found in nearby languages, albeit not attested in writing. On the other hand, words attested in Gothic are much more interesting for the table. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 09:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I personally think that table is one of the coolest things since gunpowder.Cameron Nedland 01:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, to each his own opinion. Anyway, I think we should generally limit ourselves to words with attested Gothic cognates, since the table could get rather unwieldy quite soon...
The Swedish version of the table also has reconstructed Proto-Germanic and Old English versions of the words. Looks interesting, although might need some fact-checking for errors. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 08:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Swedish version is even cooler than ours! I can't read Swedish, so I don't know what the footnotes say.Cameron Nedland 13:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aaahh, generally the same as the English version. Besides that, there's a comment about nambred (nameboard), where I don't understand why they're giving the form "brett" (not even Swedish, unless they're referring to the word "broadly"), and some pondering on whether hám- in hámweardes (homewards) is the same as home-, which I have no reason to doubt, at least as a cognate. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 17:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Someone should put sweltan in the Old English for die, as well on the Swedish page. Deman7001 22:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Placement of Scanian[edit]

Should "Scanian" really be placed under "Swedish"? The history of the dialect is muddled, and there are several Scanian regionalists who could get offended, but I'd say it's similar to Bokmål. Bokmål is geneologically (or however it's spelled) West Norse, but has turned generally East Norse due to heavy impact from Danish. Scanian is geneologically Danish, but has turned generally Swedish due to heavy impact from it. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 09:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So you think it should be under Danish?Cameron Nedland 13:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Genealogically, yeah, I think I'd prefer it. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 17:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Curiously, the Eastern Danish link in the table (the Danish dialect believed to be closest to Scanian, having emerged from a similar part of a dialectal continuum) already links to Scanian. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 17:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't Danish and Swedish be under the same language genealogically? Aaker 12:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Linguistically, they could be considered dialects of a pluricentric language continuum. Genelogically, they have diverged from a common ancestor, Old Norse. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 18:36, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lombardic (again!)[edit]

I removed Lombardic from its absurd position straddling E & WGMc and it has been reverted. The reason for removing it was quite simple and has been discussed before. Every major handbook on the history of German says Lombardic is West Germanic. Some editors of this page hold the opinion (as they're entitled to do) that it either is or might be EGmc. However, they are quite unable to support this so far with even a single source. never mind a match for the dozen or I listed some time ago on this Talk page. Since the EGmc claim flies in the face of the unanimous view in the handbooks that Lombardic is West Germanic, it really has no place on this page at all - if there were anything to it, the Lombardic page would be the place - let alone in a table which attempts to summarise the accepted view of the relationship of the Gmc languages. The idea that the note (whose claim, after all, would also seems to be untrue) somehow excuses this doesn't count as a reason to revert in my view.

I appreciate that people are attached to their opinions, but if you can't back them up with citations, what basis have you got for objecting to their removal from this page in favour of a view thoroughly supported in the published literature? --Pfold 21:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Was there actually a meaningful difference at this stage between "East Germanic" and "West Germanic"? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 21:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted because your edit summary implied that sources had been requested for a year, when there wasn't even a {{fact}} tag on it, and because simply removing Lombardic from the table doesn't solve anything. If the majority of scholars hold Lombardic to be West Germanic rather than East Germanic, then move it to the West Germanic column of the table. But keep the note explaining that there is a dispute about the issue. —Angr 21:45, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Lombardic must have been quite close to Gothic dialects: Therefore an East Germanic language, however in the last decades strongly influenced by South and West Germanic neighbours. There is no secret about this. ;-) 2001:9E8:AAA7:D500:9C6D:600B:9D4F:E525 (talk) 18:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Creoles are not considered Germanic languages"[edit]

Who doesn't consider them Germanic languages and why don't they? This looks completely arbitrary. Jacob Haller 15:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tod (sub.)/tot (adj.)[edit]

Is 'dead' in the table standing for the adjective or for the substantive (the man with the scythe/the status 'exitus')? The last is in Modern High German (der)'Tod' only the first is 'tot'. --Pistazienfresser (talk) 19:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's the adjective, same as in the other languages. —Angr If you've written a quality article... 19:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

French influence in Swedish?[edit]

I have noticed when looking in Swedish that there are some French(Romansche) based words like 'Historie', Have these words been adopted from French into Swedish or are they of a Germanic origin?80.192.246.56 (talk) 17:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)Falcon-Eagle200780.192.246.56 (talk) 17:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that one (historie) is certainly borrowed into Swedish from Romance (probably direct from Latin historia rather than from French histoire). But French also has a lot of Germanic loan words, so other similarities you see may be native Swedish words that are cognate to Frankish words that French has borrowed. Or the Swedish words and the French words may both be borrowed, since Swedish has a lot of loanwords from Low German. Your question can only be answered on a word-by-word basis, but this page isn't the place for it. —Angr If you've written a quality article... 18:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In the 18th century (I think), there were many loanwords adopted directly from French, by the Swedish aristocracy. Curiously, by comparing these to the English equivalents, in English they have often retained the spelling, but changed pronunciation, while in Swedish, the pronunciation is largely retained, but the spelling is changed, one example is English "raid", Swedish "räd". (Granted, it's just one example.) Also, Norman, a dialect of French had a notable impact from Old Norse, the predecessor of Swedish. Finally, in some cases, the words could be indirectly borrowed from French, via Low or High German, as well.惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 16:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sweden had a long phase of francophilia, where many loanwords were adopted - most have been purged from the language but some remain. BodvarBjarki (talk) 20:43, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The correct Swedish word for "history" is actually "historia" which I guess has been borrowed directly from Latin or via Low German. There are however many French loan words in Swedish. Some common examples include: apropå (fr: à propos), ingenjör (fr: ingénieur), garderob (fr: garde-robe), portmonnä (fr: porte-monnaie), löjtnant (fr: lieutenant), glass (fr: glace), fåtölj (fr: fauteuil), garanti (fr: garantie) and many more. Aaker (talk) 22:12, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Error in list Of examples?[edit]

In the list of examples en:"many" is shown as meaning de:"Manch". This is wrong IMHO. The 1:1 translation of en:"many" into German is de:"viele" where de:"Manch" means en:"some". 92.226.196.13 (talk) 18:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a list of cognates, not direct translations. The question of "semantic shift" is already noted, afaik. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 16:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Influx of vocabulary from other languages)[edit]

I believe it is rather misleading to say that Afrikaans has "a significant influx of vocabulary from other languages" in the article, because I would not say that it is greater than many other Germanic languages. The non-Germanic influx into Afrikaans is certainly much less than English has experienced and I would say less than Dutch. Afrikaans began diverging from Dutch in the 17th Century and so escaped much of the French influence that Dutch was subjected to since that period, for example. Certainly there has been an influx, but to suggest it is significantly more than other Germanic languages have experienced is misleading. Booshank (talk) 20:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At the very least it would need citing with a reliable source. In addition to Dutch, English, and Afrikaans, the other Germanic language that has experienced "a significant influx of vocabulary" from non-Germanic languages is Yiddish. —Angr 21:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think this was put in there to explain why it diverged from Standard Dutch and not as a comparison to all Germanic languages. Since it's just a tree, maybe it's not necessary at all since if a user read the article on Afrikaans, he could read more about the language. Just a thought. Kman543210 (talk) 12:10, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Even Scandinavian languages (except Icelandic) have had a notable impact from Non-Germanic languages, mostly Greco-Latin and French. Maybe it's less than for West Germanic, but certainly not ignorable. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 20:48, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


re "Diachronic": Gutnish[edit]

It's true that Gutnish is now "practically a dialect of Swedish" but the same applies to Low German and Scots - and these languages are not declared for "extinct". Shouldn't therefore the entry concerning Gutnish be corrected? Thanks. Freigut (talk) 16:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Low German is a mere dialect either of (high) German or Dutch. Scots is more unclear, depending on the variety discussed. It seems the claim is Gutnish was largely replaced by Swedish. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 09:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That being said, Gutnish still is spoken today (with differences from Swedish)so it is not 'extinct' that is why the German Diachronic should be changed Bennyj600 (talk) 16:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly Gutnish is in decline and will probably be dead within three generations, but calling it extinct would be premature. BodvarBjarki (talk) 20:47, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers in the intro[edit]

Where did these come from? They look doubtful. Leushenko (talk) 16:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The estimates of native speakers of any given language always seem to be controversial, and what's not helpful is that different "reliable" sources give different figures. What do you doubt about the figures in the introduction? Do you think that they are too low or too high? Here is what the Dictionary of Languages (Andrew Dalby) gives for each of the major Germanic languages (native speakers only):
English 350,000,000
Frisian 750,000
Dutch 20,000,000
Afrikaans 6,000,000
German 120,000,000
Luxemburgish 300,000
Yiddish 2,000,000
Swedish 9,000,000
Danish 5,500,000
Norwegian 5,000,000
Faroese 50,000
Icelandic 250,000
This book was written in 1998, so I'm guessing that these figures might be a lot higher now 10 years later. Kman543210 (talk) 07:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They look low to me. This being based on the first entry: there are more than 350 million people in the USA and UK, not counting other English-speaking countries. Obviously not 100% are native speakers but I am suspicious that the number is so much lower than the population of the countries where the language is used. Still, I have no evidence to back up my suspicion, so as long as the quoted figure is supported by an uncontroversial source I suppose there's nothing to complaim about. Leushenko (talk) 18:33, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but until we can find more updated reliable sources, we have to stick with what we have. Ethnologue is a great source, but many of the estimates are old. I've even seen estimates for some minority languages taken from 20 years ago. Reliable?...yes, but outdated as well in many cases. Kman543210 (talk) 22:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

map[edit]

the map is very distorted; the north is inclined towards the left: it gives a wrong perception of Europe as it is in reality. The results: France seems almost at the same latitudes than Germany on the map, which is far from reality! Maybe it would be better to find a map that is not so much distorted to give a better perception of how Europe really is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.59.166 (talk) 21:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that much "twist" is necessary in order to get Iceland and northern Norway on the map. And those are more important to a map of the Germanic languages than France! —Angr 04:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because the map has Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales coloured the same as England it could give the false impression that the various Celtic languages found in these countries are Germanic or that Germanic languages are the only ones spoken in these places. In contrast, Belgium doesn't have the entire area within its border coloured like this and so accounts for French being spoken in addition to Dutch. There is also the problem of the map not being labeled with dates despite being in the history section. From the way it looks I've assumed it represents the spread of Germanic languages currently spoken in Europe, but if it's supposed to represent the spread Germanic languages much earlier than ~1850 then it becomes very flawed with respect to Celtic languages. 02:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meltyman (talk • contribs)

The map is wrong in many places. East Frisian is only spoken in a tiny portion of Lower Saxony and not on the North Sea Coast. Frisian is spoken in northern Germany and not southern Denmark as it shows. It also has the island of Ruegen the wrong color as the rest of Germany. The map implies that only English is spoken in Ireland and Scotland. Not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.82.146.129 (talk) 14:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, the map implies that English is spoken in Ireland and Scotland, which is true. Colors showing where languages are spoken are not meant to imply exclusivity. +Angr 15:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The map "The present-day distribution of the Germanic languages in Europe" is wrong about the northern part of Norway: A large majority, also in the counties of Troms and Finnmark, speak Norwegian. (It is only in the two municipalities of Karasjok and Kautokeino that Sami speaking people is a majority of native speakers.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.215.163.110 (talk) 20:13, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the map is also wrong about Alemannic German, namely regarding Switzerland and Alsace-Lorraine.2001:9E8:AAA7:D500:9C6D:600B:9D4F:E525 (talk) 18:15, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Crimean Gothic[edit]

Linguistic evidence actually shows that Crimean Gothic is a West Germanic language, contrary to traditional belief. Shouldn't this somehow be altered in the article? I do not have a written source at hand, regrettably, I'm only going by what's been told to me by Harald Bjorvand, professor of germanistic linguistics at the University of Oslo. Does anyone else have a written source? I believe the misconception has arisen due to geographical reasons, seeing as Crimean Gothic was a germanic language spoken in an area assosicated with the Goths.--Alexlykke (talk) 19:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard that. All I know about Crimean Gothic is that the word for "egg" is adda, which appears to show the change of *-jj- to *-ddj- that's characteristic of East Germanic, not West Germanic. —Angr 19:59, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I have heard, whether Crimean Gothic should be considered East or West Germanic is still a matter under debate. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 00:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This issue is dealt with in the Crimean Gothic article which also cites the works you need to refer to to more detailed arguments and evidence. The statement "Linguistic evidence actually shows that Crimean Gothic is a West Germanic language, contrary to traditional belief" does not reflect the current state of scholarship. --Pfold (talk) 11:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Loanwords and Influence (Ersatz)[edit]

|I find it worth noting the range and depth of the phenomenon that is Germanic loanwords. Other than the Classical languages of Latin and Greek I believe the Germanic languages to be among the most influential in terms of vocabulary and loanwords. If you look to almost any European language you will soon find a Germanic loan in its vocabulary. It is worth considering the historical implications that this has had.

I believe it originates from the Germanic speakers as being in the right place at the right time after the Roman era. They were the most widespread tribes in the area other than the Roman descendants and the Celts, so the new technologies and cultural practices that emerged in the post-Roman period were largely named by these speakers. These words soon became easy to pass on to new peoples in Europe and along with the return of interest in the Classical languages the Germanic tongues became the most prolific givers of words.

While not as pure a group of languages as say, the Baltic tongues (who are the closest to Proto Indo-European), I think this again warrants mention in the article. I'm not going to add such a section yet until I see some opinions.| CormanoSanchez (talk) 01:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, how would you propose that section to look? 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 16:56, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

|I am merely suggesting such a section. I don't think I possess the proper number of sources and material to write it on my own without unintentionally violating policy. But I am open to any other editor with more experience to create such a section| CormanoSanchez (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


|Proposed section outline: Historical context: brief discussion of range of Germanic loans and numbers. I'm sure there are many linguists and other academics who realize the size and influence of Germanic loanwords so their input would be appreciated as proper sources for citations. Perhaps a brief history of certain important loans throughout the centuries and to which languages. A mention of the idea of ersatz (which is already in brief on the German language page) and the formation of certain word roots which have been used to preserve words. Historical implications: What the amount of Germanic loans means, especially in the case of English, and historical examples of their effects on other languages. Again, all these parts of the section would be supported by the writings of linguists and academics who understand and possess the evidence of the loans.| CormanoSanchez (talk) 18:29, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question about determiner/article usage[edit]

Could it be stated that a common feature of germanic (separating it from other IE languages) is the option of a zero-article? I am not sure about this by any means, it just occurred to me how rather than Latin or Sanskrit who have no articles ever... French/Spanish (for example) seem to need them excessively (course, compared to germanic languages). It seems that generalness in Romance languages is handled much more differently... I don't know about Celtic languages, for example... (only that they don't have indefinite pronouns)

Any ideas as to what's going on here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Retailmonica (talk • contribs) 17:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yiddish[edit]

Yiddish is a Germanic language derived from Middle High German and closely related to modern German, and it is spoken by 3 million people. I was surprised to see it missing from this page, other than in a footnote. I would follow WP:SOFIXIT, but I fear I'd make a mess of including it as I'm not that familiar with linguistics. Fences and windows (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Yiddish should definitely be included in the mainspace of the article, as well as the chart of cognates, etc. JesseRafe (talk) 03:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Scots... timeline?[edit]

I'm a bit confused about the placing of Scots in the timeline/tree.

The northern part of the Kingdom of Northumbria was incorporated into Scotland right at the start of the Middle English period, so surely this would be where the split was?

Certainly, the big language change of the time was the Norman invasion of England, and as the Scots-speaking Lothian (modern East and Mid Lothian and Borders regions) was never part of the conquered Norman territory it's unlikely that "Middle English" per se was ever spoken there.

McClure's definition of it coming from Northumbrian Old English and the Oxford description of it seem to support the classification of it as having an evolution independent of what is recognised as Middle English. Prof Wrong (talk) 21:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

McClure's definition of Scots having its origins in Northumbrian Old English, while chronologically correct in the sense that all varieties of ‘English’ derive from Old English, is somehwat misleading in that the period when Scots begins to diverge from other varieties of Northern English is after substantial immigration from Northern and Midland England of Scandinavian-influenced English-speakers in the 12-13c. Their speech perhaps having an significant influence on the route Scots was to take. See History of the Scots language. Nogger (talk) 20:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

deleting orphan: Terminological comparison between Germanic languages[edit]

I'm adding the info here, in case anyone wants to make use of it. Since no-one ever bothered to link to it, I assume there isn't much need for a separate article. If anyone here wants to restore it, please do so, and link appropriately from this or other articles. kwami (talk) 00:56, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Contents of redirected page Terminological comparison between Germanic languages ([1]), edited mainly by Articioch (talk · contribs) with additions by Furor1 (talk · contribs) and others.
pasted article contents (long)

This page offers a comparison between those words belonging to some languages of the Germanic branch (English, German, Dutch, Norwegian and Danish), words of common origin, that still maintain the same meaning. The list only considers English words having a German equivalent with the same Proto-Germanic stem, or English words hailing from Old Norse language; those latter are CAPITALIZED.

The goal of this work is to show the words' phonetic evolution of the Germanic languages, because in every line is reported the original Proto-Germanic term, if it is known.

The words in (brackets) are equivalents without the same Proto-Germanic stem; if the box is empty, no equivalent has been found; if there are three dots in the box, the English word has more than an equivalent but no one shares the stem.

NOTE ENGLISH GERMAN YIDDISH DUTCH NORWEGIAN DANISH Germanic root Old Norse root Latin root
a, an ein/eine/ein a, an een, 'n, één en, ei, et en, et unus
aboard an Bord aan boord om bord om bord ab+burd
above oben iber boven ovennevnte, ovenfor ovenanf›rt uban
adder Natter adder (huggorm) (hugorm) nadra
ADO at
after nach, sp„ter noch achter, ((daar)na) akter efter after
ale Ale (bir) ale, (bier) ›l ›l alu
alike „hnlich enlech gelijk lik lige meget galeika
all all(e) ale al alt alle, al alla
ALOFT (empor) arop (omhoog) lopt
alone allein alein alleen alene alene alla+ainaz
along entlang langs langs langs ‘nd+langa
aloud laut (oifn kol) luidop, (hoorbaar) h›yt h›jt a+hl£da
also auch oich alsook, ook ogs† ogs† auke
although obwohl (hagam, hosch) alhoewel selv om; sk›nt al+
an ein a, an een en en ainaz
and und un en og og andi
ANGER, wrath Žrger, Wut woede vrede vrede angra angr
angry ver„rgert (boos, kwaad) (sint) vred angra
ankle Kn”chel knechl enkel ankel ankel anka
answer Antwort entfer antwoord svar svar(e) ‘nd+wurda
any einige/irgend abi enige enhver ainaz
ape Affe malpe aap ape abe api
apple Apfel epl appel eple ‘ble apli
arm Arm orem arm arm arm arma
arse Arsch aars rasshøl arsle (Swedish) ors
as als asoi als s† (lige)s† als
ash Eschen(holz) es ask ask aski
ash Asche asch as aske aske aska
to [be] ashame [sich] sch„men farschemt beschamen, (zich) schamen skamme [seg] skamme [sig] skam¢
askew schief scheef skakk, skr† sk‘vt skelhwa
ass Esel eisl ezel esel ‘sel asal
ass Arsch aars rassh›l ors
to awake wach/auf-, er- wachen oifwekn wekken, wakker (worden) v†kne v‘kke ab+wak”
away weg, abw„rts awek weg v‘k ab+wega
AWE (Ehrfurcht) (ontzag, eerbied) (‘refrygt) agi
AWKWARD (eigenaardig) akavet ”fugr+ward
awl Ahle ol (syl) syl ‘l¢
ax(e) Axt hak bijl ›ks ›kse akwesj¢
axis Achse as akse akse ahs¢
AXLE Achse aks aksel aksel ”xl
bad b”se beiz beroerd bos
BAG (baal) bag baggi
BAIRN (kind) barn barn
BAIT (aas) (agn) beita
bale Ballen baal balle vareballe balw
ball Ball, Kgel (pilke) bal ball bald ballu
band Band band band b†nd b†nd banda
barefoot barfuá borwes barrevoets barbent barfodet bara+fot
BARK Borke (kore) bark, (schors) bark bark barkuz borkr
BASK baÐask
bath Bade bintl bad bad bad baça
bathe baden bodn sich baden bade bade baça
to bawl brllen (schreien) brullen hyl, vr‘l br›l bram?
beaker Becher beker b‘ger bikarjam
bean Bohne bebl boon b›nne b›nne baun¢
bear B„r ber beer bj›rn bj›rn beron
to bear (tragen) (trogn) (dragen) b‘re b‘re
beard Bart bord baard (skjegg) sk‘g bard
bed Bett bet bed bed badja
bedding Bettzeug betgewant beddegoed badja
bee Biene bin bij bie bi bij¢n
beech Buche beuk b›k b›g b¢k¢
to beep piepen biepen, piepen bippe
beer Bier bir bier (›l) (›l) beura
beetrot Rote Bete bietsuiker r›dbede rauda+
before bevor far voor f›r f›r be+for
to begin beginnen (onfangn) beginnen begynne begynde genna
behind hinter hinter achter bak bagdel henderan
bellows Blasebalg (mukn) balg belg bl‘seb‘lg balgi
bench Bank bank bank benk b‘nk banki
berry Beere (iagde) bes, -bei b‘r b‘r bazja
BERSERK (rasend) (woest, razend) berserk bers‘rk berserkr
best best best best best bedst batiz¢n
better besser beser beter (for)bedre bedre batiz¢n
to bid bieten bafeln bieden by byde beuda
bight Bucht bocht bukt bugt
bier (Toten)Bahre baar b†re b†re bera
BILLOW b›lgende masse b›lge bylgja
bind binden bindn binden binde binde benda
birch Birke berk bjerk birk berkjo
BIRTH Geburt geburt geboorte f>dsel byrd (ge)burçiz byrÐr
to bite beiáen beisn bijten bite bide beita
bitter bitter bitter bitter bitter bitter bitra
blade Blatt blad blad blad blada
to blast blasen blazen sprenge bl‘sa
to bleach bleichen bleichn bleken bleke blege bleik
to bleat bl”ken blaten breke br‘ge,br›le blauka
bleat bloss bloot breking br‘gen; br›len blauka
blind blind blind blind blind blind blinda
blood Blut blut bloed blod blod bl¢da
bloom Blum blien bloem blomst blomst bl¢m¢n
blossom Blte (kweit) bloesem blomstre blomst blos
to blow blasen blozn blazen bl†se bl¢a
BLUNDER (Fehler) (groben fehler) blunder (bommert) (bommert) blundra
blue Blau bloi blauw bl†(tt) bl† bl‚wa
board Bord bret bord brett, bord bord burd, burç
boat Boot (schifl) boot b†t b†d bout
bolt Bolzen bout bolt bolt bolt
book Buch buch boek bok bog b¢k
booth Bude bod (markeds)bod buç
BORE Bore flodb›lge b ra
to bore bohren (nudschn) boren borre bore bur¢
born geboren geboirn geboren (f›dt) b†ret burçiz
bosom Busen buzem boezem barm barm bosson
BOTH beide beide beide begge b†de bai bathir
bottom Boden (untn) bodem bunn butma
bow Bogen boog bue bue bugon
breach Bruch bres brudd breche br¢ka
bread Brot broid brood br›d br›d brauda
breadth Breite breedte bredde bredde braida
to break brechen brechn breken brekke br‘kke breka
breast Brust brust borst bryst bryst brusti
to brew brauen brouwen brygge brygge breuwan
bride Braut (kale) bruid brud brud br£di
bridge Brcke brik brug bro, bru bro brugj¢
to bring bringen brengn brengen bringe bringe brenga
bristle Borste (harte hor) borstel bust b›rste burst
broad breit breit breed bred bred braida
brooch Brosche brosch broche brosje broche
brood Brut (ge)broed, broedsel
? brothel Bordell (heizl) bordeel bordell bordel
brother Bruder bruder broe(de)r bror broder br¢ç‚r
brought bracht gebracht brakt bragt brenga
brow Braue (schtern) wenkbrauw ›yenbryn bryn braedwo
brown Braun broin bruin brunt brun br£na
to buck bocken bokken bukke bukk bukka
BULK bulklast bulki
BULL Bulle bik bul tyr, okse ( tyr; han) bul boli
bundle Bndel bintl bundel bunte bundt bund
buoy Boje boei b›je b¢kan
burden Brde (last) last, byrde byrde burd
burn brennen brien branden brenne br‘nde branneja
bush Busch (kust) bos busk busk buski
by bei bei bij ved (ved) bi
BYLAW byl”g
to cackle gackern kakelen kakle kagle
cake Kuchen kuhen koek kake kage k¢ka
calf Kalb kalb kalf kalv kalv kalbaz
to CALL kalle, ringe kalde kalla
can k”nnen kenen kunnen kan kan kan
can Kanne kan kanne kande kan
carp Karpfen karper karpe karpe karp
cart Karre (wogn) kar kjerre k‘rre krat
to CAST (werpen, gooien) kaste kaste kasta
chafer K„fer kever, tor (skarabide) (torbist) kebra
to chaw/chew kauen keien kauwen tygge kewwa
LAT cheese K„se kes kaas (ost) (ost) CASEUM
chick Kken kuiken kylling k¢ka
child Kind kind kind barn, unge (barn) kild
chilled khlte gekoeld kald, kj>lig kulde k¢lja
chin Kinn kin kin (hake) (hage) kinnu
chirp zirpen, tschirpen zirlen tjilpen, tjirpen kvitre, pipe kvidre, pippe
clad geklaidet gekleed kledd kl‘dt
clammy klamm klepik klam klam klam
claw Klaue (krel) klauw klo klo klawa
to cleave kleben klieven kl›yve kl‘be kleiba
cliff Klippe (feldz) klif klippe klint klibhom
to clink klingen klinken klirre klinge klin
to clip schneiden, knipsen knippen klippe klippe klippa
CLUB (Keule) (knuppel, klaveren) klubbe klubba
cold kalt kelt koud kulde, kald kold kalda
comb Kamm keml, kam kam kam kam kamba
to come kommen kumn komen komme komme kwema
cot Htte (kinderbed) k>ye (h‘nge)k›je kutom
to cough keuchen (hustn) kuchen, (hoesten) hoste (hoste) keuk
cow Kuh ku koe ku ko k¢u
crab Krabbe krab krab krabbe krabbe
crane Kran kraan heisekran kran kran
to CRAWL kraule krihn kruipen krabbe, krype kravle krafla
CREEK kreek kriki
cress Kresse sterrenkers karse karse krasj¢
crib Krippe (afkijken, spieken) krybbe krybbe kripa
croup Krupp kroep kryds krupp
crow Kr„he kraai (gale) krage kraw
crumb Krume kruimel (smule) krumme krum¢n
crutch Krcke kulie kruk krukke krykke krukj¢
to dab abtupfen (onpenschlen) daske daske
dale Tal tol dal dal dal dala
dam Damm dam demning d‘mning dam
damp d„mpfen damp, bedampen dempe d‘mper damp
daughter Tochter tochter dochter datter datter duhter
daw Dohle (kauw, torenkraai) (allike) dawa
dawn D„mmerung dageraad, dagen daggry dages
day Tag tog dag dag, d›gn dag daga
dead tot toit dood d›d d›d dauda
deaf taub toit? doof d›v d›v dauba
death Tod toit dood d›d d›d dauda
deck Verdeck dek dek dekk d‘k dec
deed, did Tat daad d†d d?diz
deep tief tif diep dyp dyb deupa
to DIE (sterben) (schtarbn) (sterven) d› d› deyja
dike Deich dambe dijk dike dige d¡ka
dill Dill (krop) dille dill dild dile
DIRT Dreck drek skitt, s>le drit
to do tun ton doen gj>re d¢
door Tr tir deur d›r d›r dur
dopey doof dom t†pelig (dum)
dough Teig teig deeg deig dej daigaz
dove Taube toib duif due due d£b¢n
dowel Dbel deuvel tapp, dybbel dyvel
down Daune donsveer, dons dun dun adune
doze d”sen dremln doezelen, dutten d›se d›se
dream Traum (holem) droom dr›m dr›m drauma
DREGS (droesem) bunnfall, berme dregg
drink trinken trinkn drinken drikke drikke drenka
to drip tr”pfeln dripn druipen dryppe dryppe dribhan
to drive treiben treibn drijven, (besturen) drive, kj>re dreiba
to drone dr”hnen dreunen dovne dron
drop Tropfen(weise) drop/druppel dr†pe dryp, dr†be drup¢n
drum Trommel trom(mel) tromme tromme tromme
dry trocken trukn droog, drogen t›rke t›rre drug/druk
to dung dngen (drek/drol) (gj›dsle) (g›de)
to dunk tunken dopen, (soppen) duppe, dyppe dyppe dunk¢
dusky dster duister dunkel çeustrija
dwarf Zwerg dwerg dverg dv‘rg dwerga
ear Ohr oier oor ›re ›re auz¢n
earnest ernst ernst ernstig alvorlig (alvor) arni
earth Erde erd aarde jord jord erç¢
east Osten (misrach) oosten ›st ›st austa
easter Ostern (pasen) (p†ske) (p†ske)
to eat essen, speisen esn eten ete, spise ‘de, spise eta
ebb Ebbe eb ebbe ebbe abj¢n
eel Aal (wenger) aal †l †l ‘la
EGG Ei ei ei egg ‘g ajjaz egg
eight acht acht acht †tte otte ahtau
elbow Ellenbogen elnboign elleboog albue albue
elk Elch (los) (eland/wapiti) elg elg elh
ell Elle el alen al¡n¢
elm Ulme olm alm elm alm
end Ende end einde ende ende andija
enough genug genug genoeg nok nok gan¢ga
to err irren (vergissen, dwalen) feile (fejle) erzja
to eschew scheuen schuwen sky sky
to etch „tzen etsen etse ‘tse
evening Abend own avond aften eband
even Eben even jevn j‘vn ebna
evil bel, b”se (kwade) ond ubila
eye Auge oig oog ›ye ›je aug¢n
to fall fallen faln vallen falle falde falla
far fern ver fjern fjern fer(e)r¢
fat fett fez vet fett fed faita
fast fest fest vast faste faste fastu
father Vater foter vader far, fader fa(de)r fader
fay Fee fee fe fe
fear Furcht vrees frykt frygt furchta
feather Feder feder veer, veder fj‘r fjer fedur¢
to feel fhlen filn voelen f›le f¢lja
feet Fáe voeten f›tter f›dder f¢tu
felloe Felge velge f‘lg felg¢
felt Filz pilz vilt filt filt
fern Farn varen (bregne) (bregne) farna
ferry F„hre (prom) veer ferge f‘rge
field Feld feld veld felt felt felça
fiend Feind teiwl vijand djevel, misbruker fijand
fiery feurig vurig fyrig fyrig
fife Pfeife (dode) pijp pibe
fig Feige feig vijg fiken figen feigja
file Feile fail vijl fil fil f¡l¢
to fill fllen oisfiln vullen fylle fylde f¢lja
finch Fink vink finke fink¢n
to find finden gefinen vinden finne finde fença
finger Finger finger vinger finger finger fengra
fire Feuer faier vuur fyr fewur
fish Fisch fisch vis fisk fisk fiska
fist Faust foist vuist (knytteve) f£sti
five Fnf finf vijf fem fem femf
to flacker flattern fladderen flakke flake flaktan
flag Flagge fon vlag flagg
flail Flegel vlegel plejl
flake Flocke vlok flak flage flukke
flat flach flach vlak, plat flat flad flata
flaw Fehler flauwte, (fout) feil fejl felha
flax Flachs vlas (lin) (h›r) flahso
flea Floh floi vlo (loppe) (loppe)
fled floh gevlogen, vliedde flauha
to flee fliehen antloifn vluchten, vlieden flykte flygte fleuha
fleece Vlies fel vlies (uld, skind) fl¡s
flesh Fleisch fleisch vlees fleiska
flew flog vloog fl›j fleuha
to flicker flackern flikkeren flimre flagre flaktan
flight Flug, Flucht fli vlucht flyging, flytur, fly flugt fluchti
to FLIT flitzen flitsen fly flyve flytja
to flitter flattern fladderen flagre flagre
float Floá vlot fl†te flyde
to flood Flut vloeden flod
flow Fluá, Flut fleiz vloeien flyt flyde fl¢wa
flown geflogen gevlogen fl›jet fleuha
fluff Flaum (puch) (pluis) fjon fnug
to fly fliegen flien vliegen fly flyve fleuga
foal Fohlen veulen f›ll f›l ful¢n
fold Falt falz vouw flok fold falça
-fold -f„ltig -voudig fold fold
folk Volk folk volk folk folk fulka
foot Fuá fus voet fot fod f¢tu
for fr far voor for for fora
forbade verbot verbood
forbear Vorfahr voorvader
to forbid verbieten farwern verbieden forby forbyde
forbidden vergeboten farbotn verboden
ford Furt voorde (vad) (vadested) furdu
fore vorn voorste foran forrest forn
to forget vergessen fargesn vergeten (glemme) fora+getan
forth hervor (arois) voort frem
forward vorw„rts forois voorwaarts fremad
four vier fir vier fire fire
fowl Vogel/Geflgel (of) gevogelte fugl
fox Fuchs fuks vos (rev) (r‘v) fuhsa
free frei frei vrij fri fri frija
freight Fracht vracht frakt fragt
fretting anfressend vretend
to freeze frieren bevriezen fryse fryse freusa
Friday Freitag freitik vrijdag fredag fredag frigg+daga
friend Freund freind vriend (venn) frijond
frog Frosch frosch (kikker, puit) frosk fr› fruska
frost Frost frost vorst frost frost freusa
froze fror bevroor, bevroos fr›s
to fudge pfuschen (prutsen) fuske
full v”llig, voll full vol full, fylt fuld fulla
furrow Furche voor fure plovfure furh¢
to fuzz fusseln (pluizen) fussig
gable Giebel geveltop gavl gavl gibla
gall Galle gal gal galle galde gall¢n
GAME (Spiel) (schpil) (spel) (spill) (spil) gaman
gander G„nserich gander, ganzerik gasse gase
gangway Gang doorgang gang landgang ganga
to gape (an)gaffen gapn gapen gape gabe gapa
garden Garten gortn (tuin) (have) gard¢n
GARTH Garten gard¢n garÐr
gate Gatter (hek) gadon
gave gab gaf gav geba
to GAWK gaffen gapen glo ga
geese G„nse ganzen g‘s
to GET (gaan) geta
ghost Geist geist geest gaista
GIFT Gabe gift gave gave gift
gild vergolden opgiltn vergulden fogylle forgyld gulça
girdle Grtel gordel gjord, belte griddle gurdja
GIRTH Gurt gordel gjord, belte gjord gj”rÐ
git Einguss gieten
to GIVE geben gebn geven gi give geba gefa
given gegeben gegeven givet
glary grell (schel) grel
glass Glas glos glas glas glas gla-
to glaze glasieren glazig worden gla-
to glide gleiten glischn sich glijden gli glide gleida
to glisten glitzern glinsteren gitre, glinse glinse
glow glhen gloed gl›d gl›de
gnarl Knorren knoest kvist
? to gnash knirschen knarsen (skj‘re) gnaista
to gnaw nagen knagen gnage gnave gnaga
to go gehen gein gaan g† g† g‘
god Gott got god gud gud guç
to goggle glotzen (staren)
gold Gold gold goud gull guld gulça
good gut gut goed gode god g¢da
goose Gans gandz gans g†s g†s gans
GOSLING G„nsekken, G”ssel gansje g†sunge g‘sling g‘slingr
grass Gras gros gras gress gr‘s grasa
grave Grab grob graf grav grav grab
gray grau groi grauw, grijs gr† gr† gr‘wa
to graze abgrasen (af)grazen gr‘sse
great gross grois groot (stor) grauta
greed Gier gir gretigheid gr†dighet gr†dighed g‚r
green grn grin groen gr›nt gr›nt GRàNI
to greet gráen bagrisn groeten (hilse) (hilse) gr¢t
to grin grinsen grijnzen grin gr¡n
gripe Griff greep (klage) greb
grisly gr„álich afgrijselijk, griezelig grusom
groat Groschen groot (styver)
(bride)groom Br„utigam bruidegom brudgom brudgom
ground Grund grunt grond grunn grund grundu
to grub graben graven grave grave
grubbed grub groef greb
to grunt grunzen grommen grynte grynte
GUEST Gast gast gjest g‘st gasti gestr
guild Gilde gilde (laug) gilde gild
GUN Gunnhildr
GUST (windvlaag, -stoot) gustr
to gurgle gurgeln gorgelen klukke gurgle
HACK Hacke hak hakke hak(ke) hakk h”ggva
hag Hexe heks heks heks heka
to HAGGLE (pingelen) hage haggen
hail Hagel hogl hagel hagl hagl hagla
hail! heil! (bagrisn) heil hil! haila
hair Haar hor haar h†r(str†) h†r hazwa
half halb halb half halv halv halba
hall Halle hal hall hal hall¢
to halt anhalten aanhouden halte halt
to halve halbieren halveren halvere halvere halba
hammer Hammer hamer hamer hammer hammer hamara
hand Hand hant, tefech hand h†nd h†nd handu
to hang h„ngen hengn hangen henge h‘nge hanha
hard hart hart hard hard h†rd hardu
hare Hase haas hare hare has¢n
to hark horchen (aanhoren, luisteren) (lytte, h›re) (h›re)
harvest Herbst herfst, (oogst) h›st h›st harbista
he/she/it has er/sie/es hat hij, zij, het heeft han/hun/det,der har hab¢
hasp Haspe hasp haspe hasp¢
hasty hastig haastig (hurtig) hastig
hat Hut hut hoed hatt hat h¢da
hate Haá has haat hat had hatas
to have haben hobn hebben ha have hab¢
haven Hafen haven havn havn
haw Hagebutte (rozenbottel) (hagtornb‘r) heup¢n
hawk Habicht havik hauk h›g habuka
hay Heu hei hooi h›y h› hawja
hazel Hasel hazelaar hassel hassel hasla
head Haupt hoipt, heiptl hoofd hode hoved haubida
to heal heilen he(i)ln helen hele hele
to heap haufen (kupe) ophopen hob h£p
to hear h”ren hern horen h›re h›re hauzija
to hearken horchen (aanhoren, luisteren) (lytte)
heart Herz harz hart hjerte hjerte hert¢n
hearth Herd haard herd hesse, herd herd
heat Hitze hiz hitte hete hede haita
heathen heidnisch heidens hedning hedensk haiç
heather Heide heide (r›sslyng) (lyng) haiçei
heating Heizung bahizung (verwarming) (oppvarming) (opvarmning)
to heave heben heibn opheffen heve h‘ve hafja
heaven Himmel himl hemel himmel himmel(en) himena->hibina
hedge Hecke heg hekk hegn hagj¢
height H”he heich hoogte h›yde h›jde
HELL H”lle (gehenem) hel helvete helvede halj¢ Hel
helmet Helm helm hjelm hjelm helma
help Hilfe hilf hulp hjelp hj‘lp
hemp Hanf hennep hamp hamp hanapa
hen Huhn, Henne hun hen h›ne h›ne; hun han¢n
her ihre ir haar henne hende
herd Herde (stade) horde, (kudde, troep) hjord hjord herd¢
here hier aher hier her her
herring Hering hering haring (sild) (sild) harenga
to hew hauen houwen hugge hugge hawwa
hey he hei, hoi, hé hei, hoi hej
high hoch hoich hoog h›y h›j hauha
hight hieá heette hed
hill Hgel (bergl) heuvel haug h›j houg
him ihm im hem ham ham
hip Hfte heup hofte hofte hupi
to HIT (slaan, treffzn) hitta
hoe Haue (schoffel) (hakke) (hakke)
to hold halten haltn houden holde hold halda
hollow Hohl holel hol hul hulning hula
holm Holm helmstok, (boom, steel) holme holm hulma
holy heilig heilig hellig hellig
home Heim heim thuis, huis hjem hjem haima
hoof Huf hoef hov hov h¢fa
hook Haken hoek, haak krok, hake hage hak¢n
hope Hoffnung hofenung hoop h†p h†b hop
horn Horn hoorn horn horn hurnan
hot heiá heis heet het hed haita
hound Hund hond hund jagthund hunda
house Haus hois huis hus hus h£sa
hove hob opgeheven
howitzer Haubitze houwitzer haubitzer
howl heulen huilen hyle, ule hyle hulon
hundred hundert hundert honderd hundre hundrede hunda
hunger Hunger hunger honger hunger hungru
hurdle Hrte horde (hinder) hurdle
HUSBAND (echtgenoot) (husholde) husbondi
hut Htte hut hytte
I ich ich ik jeg jeg
ice Eis eis ijs is is ¡sa
in in in in inn inde
iron Eisen eizn ijzer jern jern ¡sarna
he/she/it is er/sie/es ist er/zi/es is hij/zij/het is han/hun/det,der er
island Eiland insl eiland (›y) (helle, ›)
ivy Efeu (klimop) ef›y efeu efi
kale Kohl kool k†l gr›nk†l kula
keel Kiel kil kiel kj›l k›l
kernel Kern kern kern kjerne kerne
kettle Kessel kesl ketel kjele kedel katila
king K”nig kenig, meilech koning konge konge kuning
to kiss kssen kuschn kussen kysse kys kussija
kitchen Kche kich keuken kj›kken k›kken
kitten K„tzchen kezl katje kattunge kattekilling
to knead kneten kneden kna (‘lte) kneda
knee Knie kni knie kne kn‘ knewa
to kneel knien kniien knielen knele kn‘le
KNIFE (Messer) (meser) (mes) kniv kniv knifr
knob Knopf knop kno(o)p knapp knop knop
knop Knopf kno(o)p knott
KNOT Knot knup kno(o)p knute, knop knude knot knutr
to know k”nnen kenen kennen, kunnen kunne, kjenne kunne
knuckle Kn”chel knokkel knoke kno
knurl Knoten knot, knobbel knute, knoll
LAD (Junge) (iat) (jongen, knul) ladd
ladder Leiter leiter ladder leider lejder hlaidrj¢
to lade laden laden lade hlaça
laid legte gelegd lagde
lair Lager leger leie leje
lamb Lamm lam lam lamme lam lambaz
lame lahm lom lam (halt) lama
land Land land land land land landa
to lap berlappen overlappen lepje labbe lap
larch L„rche lork l‘rk
lark Lerche leeuwerik lerke l‘rke
lath Latte lat lekte, lekt l‘gte latte
LATHE (draaibank) (dreiebenk) (drejeb‘nk) hlaÐa
latter letzte laatst(e) (sidst) lata
to laugh lachen lachn lachen le le hlahja
LAW (wet) lov lov lagu
to lay legen leign leggen legge l‘gge lageja
to leach laugen logen
to lead leiten leiden lede lede leita
leak Leck lek lekk l‘k
to lean lehnen onlenen sich leunen lene l‘ne hlin‘
to learn lernen lernen sich leren l‘re l‘re lais
leather Leder leder leer l‘r l‘der leçra
leek Lauch look, prei (purre) (porre) lauka
LEG (Bein) (been) (ben) (ben) leggr
length L„nge leng lengte lengde l‘ngde langa
to let lassen losn laten la, leie, late lade l‘ta
to lick lecken lekn likken, lekken slikke slikke lekkan
lid Lid lign lid lokk l†g hlida
life Leben lebn leven liv liv lib‘
light leicht/Licht licht licht lys lys lenht/leuhta
like „hnlich enlecher gelijke lig(e) gal¡k
lip Lippe lip lip leppe l‘be lep
to lisp lispeln lispelen lespe l‘spe wlisp
listless lustlos lusteloos likegyldig ligeglad lustu+lausa
LITMUS Lackmus lakmoes lakmus lakmus litmose
liver Leber leber lever lever lever libr¢
to load laden lodn laden lade laça
loaf Laib lebn (brood) hlaiba
loam Lehm leem lermuld leima
to loan leihen leien lenen l†ne udl†ne
lobe Lappen lap lapp lap lap
long lang lang lang lang lang langa
LOOSE lose lois los l›s l›s lauss
loud laut luid h›ylytt lydelig hl£da
louse Laus lois luis lus lus
love Liebe libe liefde leuba
LOW (niedrig) (niderik) laag lav lav lagr
luck Glck glik, masl geluk lykke lykke lukk
lukewarm lauwarm lauwwarm lunken lunken
lung Lunge lung long lunge lunge lungumnij¢
lust Lust lust lyst lyst lustu
maid M„dchen (dinst) meisje, meid m›y m› magaçi
to make machen machn maken mak¢
malt Malz malz mout malt malt malta
man Mann man man mann mand manon
mane M„hne (griwe) manen man manke man¢
to mark markieren markeren merke m‘rke mark¢
to marl mergeln mergle
maser Maser maser
mast Mast mastboim mast mast mast masta
to may m”gen megn mogen m†(tte) m† mag
me mir, mich mir, mich mij, me meg mig
mead Met mj›d mj›d medu
meal Mahl mol(zeit) maal m†ltid, mat m†ltid mala
to mean meinen meinen gemeen mene mene mainija
mellow mrbe mild moden moden murwja
? to melt schmelzen schmelzn smelten smelte smelte smelta
mesh Masche (eigl) maas maske maskw¢
to mete messen meten (m†le) meta
to mew miauen miauwen mjaue mjave
mice M„use muizen mus
mid mittler mit- midden midt midt- medjon
midge Mcke mug dansemyg, mitte mugjon
mien Miene
might Macht macht makt magt mah
mild mild mild mild mild mild meldi
mildew Mehltau meeldauw meldugg meldug
milk Milch milch melk melk m‘lk meluk
mill Mhle mil molen m›lle m›lle
miller Mller milner (molenaar) m›ller m›ller
milt Milz milt milt meltja
MIRE Morast moeras myr mose myrr
to miss vermissen missen missa
to MISTAKE .. mistaka
mistletoe Mistel maretak misteltein mistelten mistil¢
month Monat monat maand m†ned m†ned m‘n¢ç
moon Mond (lewone) maan m†ne m†ne m‘n¢ç
moorland Heidemoor (heide)
more mehr mer meer mer mere maiz¢n
morn/morning Morgen frimorgn morgen morgen morgen murgena
moss Moos moch mos mose mose m£sa
most meist merste meeste(n) mest mest
mosten meiátens meestal
moth Motte mol mot m›ll m›l muççon
mother Mutter muter moeder moder, mor moder m¢der
to mould mausern (ruien) mugne
mouse Maus mois muis mus mus m£s
mouth Mund mond mugne mund munça
to mow m„hen maaien m‘a
MUCK Mist mest m›kk m›g mihstu mugge
mull Mull moll moll
to mum vermummen vermommen
to mumble murmeln mompelen, murmelen mumle mumle
murder M”rder mord moordenaar mord mord
to must mssen musn moeten m†, m†tte m†
my/mine mein/e mein mijn min, mine min, mine
to nab schnappen snappen nappe nappe snab
to nag n”rgeln (gn†le, mase)
nail Nagel nogl nagel negl negl nagla
naked nackt naket naakt naken n›gen nakwada
name Name nomen naam navn navn nam¢n
nap Noppe nop(je) hnop
natty nett nett
nay nein neen nei
near nahe noent na n‘r n‘r
neat nett net
neck Nacken nek hnakka
needle Nadel nodl naald n†l n†l n‘çlo
neighbor Nachbar (buurman) nabo nabo; naboerske
nest Nest nest nest nista
net Netz nez net nett net natja
nettle Nessel netel nesle n‘lde natilon
new neu nai nieuw ny ny neuja
next n„chste naast neste n‘ste
to nibble knabbern naschn knabbelen, knagen knabb
nickel Nickel nikkel nikkel nikkel
niece Nichte (plimenize) nicht niese niece nefti
nigh nahe na n‘r
night Nacht nacht nacht natt nat naht
nine neun negen ni ni newun
nipple Nippel opl nippel nippel nippel
noodle Nudel (loksch) knoedel nudel
north Nord (zofn) noord nord nord norça
nose Nase nos neus nese n‘se nas¢
notch Nut
now nun (izt) nu, nou n† nu nu
nut Nuá nus noot n›tt n›d hnut
OAF alfr
oak Eiche eik eik eg aik¢
oath Eid eed ed ed aiça
ODD odde oddi
offall Abfall (ploiles) afval affald ab+falla
often oftmals oft ofte ofte
ogle lieb„ugeln
old alt alt oud alda
on an (oif) aan (p†) om
one eins eins een ener en, et
to open ”ffnen ofn openen †pne †bne
or oder oder of eller eller(s)
otter Otter (widre) otter odder utra
ouch/ow! autsch! oi! au! av!
our unser unser ons, onze v†r vor unsak
out aus arois uit ytre ud £t
oven Ofen oiwn oven ovn ovn ufna
over herber iber over over over
owl Eule uil ugle ugle
own eigen eign eigen egen, eget, egne egen
ox Ochse oks os okse uhs¢h
oyster Auster oister oester ›sters ›sters
paddle Paddel peddel padle†re padle
path Pfad pad paça
paw Pfote poot pote pote pauta
to peck picken pik pikken bek
to peep piepsen piepen pipe pippe, pibe
to pick aufpiecken pikn pikken plukke
pipe Pfeife pipke pijp pipe pibe
to plash platschen plassen plaske pjaske
to plop plumpsen plompen plumpe plumpe
PLOUGH Pflug ploeg plog plov plug
to PLOW pflgen ploegen pl›ye pl›je plug
to pluck pflcken plukken plukke plukke
plum Pflaume floim pruim plomme blomme
to plunder plndern (barabewn) plunderen plyndre plyndre
pock Pocke (kalusche) pok (pustel) (pustel)
puddle Pftze pok poel pytt p›l
to puff away paffen praichn paffen (puste)
radish Rettich retech (rammenas) reddik radise; r‘ddike
to RAFT rafte raptr
rain Regen regn regen regn regn regna
to RAISE reise rejse reisa
rank Rang rang rekke, rang rang
to RANSACK (nischtern) ransake ransage rannsaka
rape Raub roof rov raub¢
to rasp raspeln ripn raspen raspe rasp
rat Ratte (schschur) rat rotte rotte
? ratch Ratsche
to rattle rasseln (gragern) ratelen rangle, ralle rasle
raven Rabe (woron) raaf ravn ravn hrabna
raw roh/Rau roi rauw r† r† hrawa
to reach reichen greichn reiken rekke r‘kke
to reckon rechnen rechenen (be/mee)rekenen regne regne
red rot roit rood r›d r›d rauda
reef Riff rif rif rev reb
reek Rauch rook r›g rauki
to reek riechen (schmuchtn) ruiken ryke ryge rauki
REINDEER Ren(tier) rendier reins(dyr) rens(dyr) hreindyri
rep Ruf roep reps ht¢pa
rest Rest rest resten rast
rich reich reich rijk rik rig r¡kja
ridden geritten gereden redet
(to) ride reiten/Ritt raitn rijden/rit ri, ride/ritt ride/ridt reida
riddle R„tsel raadsel (g†te) r‘da
to riffle riffeln
rift Riá (schpalt) revne revne; rift
right rechts recht rechts rett ret; rigtig
rill Rinnsal rinde; risle
rim Reim rijm reum¢n
rind Rinde rund ( bark; skal; skorpe) rend¢n
ring Ring ring ring ring ring
to rip reiáen reisn rive rive wreita
ripe reif (zeitik) rijp wr¢gij¢
to RIVE rifa
to roast r”sten roesten riste rauteja
to rob rauben roven r›ve raub¢
rod, rood Rute rut roe(de) r¢d¢
rode ritt reed red
roe (deer) Reh roig ree r†dyr r†dyr raiha
room Raum ruimte rom rum r£ma
ROOT (Wurzel) (worzl) (wortel) rot rod rot
rotten verrotteten (ver)rot r†tten r†dden
rough rauh roi ruw, ruig ru ru ruhw
round Runde rond runde rund
to rub reiben reibn skrubbe rive wreiba
to RUCK rynke rynke ruke
rudder Ruder roer ror ror roçra
to rue bereuen
to rumble rumpeln arumblonkn rommelen ramle rumle
RUNE Rune rune rune rune r£n
to rust (ein/ver)rosten roesten ruste ruste
? to rustle rascheln ruisen, ritselen rasle rasle
rye Roggen rogge rug rug rug¢n
saddle Sattel sotl zadel sadel sadel
to sag sacken verzakken svikte, synke, sige synke
sail Segel segl zeil seil sejl segla
SALE (Verkauf) (farkoif) (verkoop) selg salg sala
salt Salz zalz zout salt salt salta
sand Sand zamd zand sand sand sanda
to sank sanken zinken sank
sap Saft zaft, sapt sap saft saft sapi
sat saá/gesessen zat/gezeten sad/siddet
to sate s„ttigen verzadigen (m‘tte; overfylde)
saw sah zag s†
to say sagen zogn zeggen sage sige sag‘
scab Schorf skabb, skurv skab
SCALE Waagschale skale weegschal skjell (v‘gt)sk†l skal
SCARY schaurig skremmende skr‘mmende skirra
SCARF (Schal) (sjerp) skjerf (halst›rkl‘de) skarfr
to SCATHE skade skade skaÐa
SCORE sk†re skor
SCRAP skrap skrap
SCRAPE Kratzen geschraap skrape skrabe skrapa
to scoop sch”pfen schep skuffe
to scrabble scharren kriebelen skrape (kradse)
to scream schreien schreien schreeuwen skrike skrige skreia
to screech kreischen kwischn skrike skrige
screw Schraube schroif schroef skru skrue
scum Schaum schleim schuim skum skum sk£m
sea See (iam) zee sj› s› saiwi
seat Sitz sizplaz zitplaats sete s‘de satja, setja
to see sehen zn zien se se sehwa
seed Saat (zoimen) zaad s‘d s‘d s‘di
to seek suchen zuchn zoeken s›ke s›ge s¢keja
to SEEM synes soema
self selbst zelf selv selv
to send senden zenden sende sende
sent sendete, sandte zond sendte
sent gesandt, gesendet gezonden sendt
set Satz sett s‘tte
seven sieben sibn zeven sju syv sebun
shabby sch„bige (opgelosn) (sjofel) (sjasket) (lurvet)
shade/shadow beschatten schotn (be)schaduwen skygge skygge skaçwa
shaft Schacht schachte schacht skakt
shaft Schaft schacht skaft skaft
to shall sollen zullen skal skal skal
shallot Schalotte sjalot skalottel›g sloç
sham Schein schijn
shame Scham schaamte skam skam skam¢(n)
shank Schenkel skank skank skenk, skink
shard Scherbe scherf sk†r pottesk†r skera, skerb
sharp scharf scherf skarp skarp skarpa
shawl Schal schal sjaal sjal sjal
she sie zi zij, ze (hun; den; det;)
to shear scheren schern scheren (klippe)
sheep Schaf scheps schaap sau (f†r) sk¢epa
shield Schild schild skjold skjold skeldu
to shift schieben schuiven skifte skeub
shilling Schilling skillinga
to shimmer schimmern schijnen skimre skinne skeima
shin(bone) Schienbein scheenbeen skinnbein skinneben
to shine scheinen scheinen schijnen skinne skinne skeina
ship Schiff schif schip skip skib skipa
shit Scheiáe skitt skide
shoe Schuh schuf schoen sko sko sk¢ha
shone schien/geschienen scheen, geschenen skin¢
shoot/shot Schuá schprot, schis schot skudd skyde
should sollte zou(den) skaller
shoulder Schulter (aksl) schouder skulder skulder skuldr¢
shout Schrei (geschrei) schreeuw (r†b) skreia
to shove schieben schtupn schuiven skubbe skub skeub
shovel Schaufel (ridl) schep, schop, schoep skyffel skovl sk£fl¢
show Schau (oisschtelung) schouwen skue skauw¢
shriek Schrei (kwisch) schreeuw skrik skrig skreia
shrill schrill (kwischik) schril skril
shrine Schrein skrin helgenskrin
to shuffle schlurfen scharn sloffen skubbe (sjokke)
to shut schlieáen (farmachen) sluiten
shy scheu schemewdik schuw sky sky skeuha
sickle Sichel serp sikkel sigd segl
side Seite zeit zijde side side seid¢n
sieve Sieb zip zeef sil sigte sibi
sight Sicht zicht sikte syn
silver Silber silber zilver s›lv s›lv silubr
sin Snde sind zonde synd synd sanç
sinew Sehne schpanoder sene sene sinw¢
to sing singen zingn zingen synge synge sengwa
to sink sinken zinkn zinken synke, senke synke senkwa
to sinter sintern sintre sintre
sister Schwester schwester zuster s›ster s›ster swester
to sit sitzen zizn zitten sitte sidde satja, setja
six sechs seks zes seks seks sehs
SKATE Rochen (glischer?) rog rokke skade, rokke skata
skew schief (krum) scheef skjev sk‘v skaifa
to SKID schlittern glischn sich (schuiven) skli skiÐ
SKILL (bekies) skil
SKIN (Haut, Fell) (huid, vel) skinn skind skinn
to SKIP hpfen, springen hopkn huppelen, springen hoppe, springe sjippe, hoppe, springe

skopa ||

SKIRT (Rock) (rok) skj›rt sk›rt skyrta
to skulk schleichen sluipen
SKY (Himmel) (himl) (hemel) (himmel) (himmel) sky
slag Schlacke slak slagg slagge slaka
to slaughter schlachten slachten slakte slagte slahtr
sleep Schlaf schlof slaap s›vn s›vn sl‘pa
SLEIGHT sluhet sl gÐ
SLEUTH sloÐ
slime Schleim schleim slijm slim slim sl¡ma
slit Schlitz (schnit) spleet, split, sleuf slids
sloe Schlehe sl†en(b‘r) slaiwa
slot Schlitz schpeltl
slummer Schlummer sluimering slum
sly schlau (hitre) sluw slu sluhwa
to smack schmatzen smakken smekke smage
to smear schmieren schmirn smeren sm›re sm›re
to smelt schmelzen smelte smelte smelta
smith Schmied smid smed smed smiça
to smuggle schmuggeln smokkelen smugle smit
smut Schmutz schmuz smeerboel smuss smit
to snap schnappen (knakn) snappen snappe snappe snab
to sneeze niesen nisn niezen nyse nyse hneusa
? to snicker kichern giechelen (knegge)
to sniff schnffeln snuffen snufse sn›fte
to snip schnippeln nijden, knippen .
snipe Schnepfe snip sneppe
to snoop schnffeln rondsnuffelen snuse snuse
to snore schnarchen (hropn) snurken snorke snorke snark
snout Schnauze schnuk snuit snute snude
snow Schnee schnei sneeuw sn› sne snaiwa
to SNUB snubba
to snuff schnupfen snuif snuse snuse
to snuffle schnupperen snotteren sn›vling sn›fte
so so asoi zo s† s†
soap Seife seif zeep s†pe s‘be s‚pa
soft sanft zacht sampftija
son Sohn sun zoon s›nn s›n sunu
sorrow Sorge sorg sorg surg¢
soul Seele (neschume) ziel sjel sj‘l sailwal¢
sour sauer zoier zuur sur sur s£ra
south Sd (dorem) zuid s›r syd sunça
sow Sau (haserte) zeug so s†
spade Spaten (ridl) spade spar spad¢n
span Spanne schpan span spann spand spenna
to spare sparen sparen spare spare spar¢e
sparrow Sparber (mus) spurv spurv sparo
spat gespeit gespuwd
to speak sprechen spreken sprekan
spear Speer speer speeru
spelt Spelz spelt
to spew, to puke speien, spucken spuwen spy spy spuk
spike Stift stift (spids, spyd, spiger) st¡f
spiky spitz spits spiss spids
spindle Spindel schpindl spindel spindel spindel spendil¢
to spit speien, spucken schpeien spuwen spytte spidde spuk
splint Splint splint splint
spook Spuk spook sp›ke sp›gelse spuk
to spool spulen spoelen spole spole
spoor Spur spoor spor spor spura
sprat Sprotte sprot (brisling)
to sprint spurten spurt sprinte
to sprout sprieáen spruiten spire spire
spurt Spurte (ris) spurt spurt spurt
? to squawk qu„ken
? to squeak quieken skrike skrige
staff Stab (schtekn) staf stab, stav stav stabia
STAGGER (waklen sich) stakra
to stand stehen schtein staan st† st† st‘
stank stank stonk stank
star Stern schtern ster stjerne stjerne stern¢n
to stare starren staren stirre stirre star
starling Star st‘r st‘r star¢n
STEAK bifsteik steik
to steal stehlen (ganwenen) stelen stjele stj‘le stela
steel Stahl schtol staal st†l st†l
steer steuern besturen sturen styre styre
to stem stemmen stamme
stick Stock stok stokk stok, stykke stukka
stiff steif schtoif stijf stiv stiv st¡f
still still schtil stil stille stille stellja
stilt Stelze stelt stylte stylte
to stink stinken schtinkn stinken stinke stinke stenkwa
stolen gestolen gestolen stj†let
stone Stein schtein steen stein sten staina
stork Storch (ooievaar) stork stork sturka
storm Sturm schturem storm storm storm sturma
to strain anstrengen onschtrengn anstrenge (stramme)
strand Strand strand strand strand
straw Stroh schtroi stro str† str† strawa
to stray streunen struinen streife strejfe
stream Strom stroom str›m str›m strauma
LAT street Straáe, Gasse (gas) straat gate gade GAT (VIA) STRATA
to stretch strecken strekken strekke str‘kke strek
to strew streuen strooien str› str› straueja
strike Streik straik staking streik (sl†) str¡k?
to strip abstreifen stripe streip
to strive streben schtrebn streven strebe str‘be
to stroke streicheln strijken stryke
stubble Stoppel stoppel stubb stubbe
stuff Stoff stof stoff stof
to stuff stopfen stoppen stoppe stoppe
to STUMBLE stolpern schtompern strompelen snuble snuble stumra
stump Stumpf (korsch) stomp stubbe stu(m)p stub
stunk gestunken gestonken stinket
sturgeon St”r steur st›r st›r sturj¢n
such solch (asa) zulk (s†dan) swaleika
to suck saugen zoign zuigen suge suge s£ga
summer Sommer zumer zomer sommer sommer sumera
sump Sumpf sump sump swump
sun Sonne sun zon (sol) (sol) sunno
sung gesungen gezongen sunket
sunken versunken gezonken sunket s‘nket
swallow Schwalbe schwalb zwaluw svale svale swalw¢n
swamp Sumpf zump (moeras) sump sump swump
swan Schwan zwaan svane svane swana
swang schwang swingde swangra
swarm Schwarm zwerm sverm sv‘rm swarma
swart schwarz schwarz zwart svartsmusket m›rkl›det; m›rkladen swarta
swath Schwade (sk†r) sweç
to swear schw”ren schwern zweren sverge sv‘rge swarja
to sweat schwitzen schwizn zweten svette svede swaita
sweet sá sis zoet s›t s›d sw¢tu
to swell schwellen zwellen svelle svulme swella
to swim schwimmen schwimn zwemmen sv›mme sv›mme swemma
to swindle schwindeln zwendelen svindle svindle
swine Schwein zwijn svin svin sw¡na
to swing schwingen swingen svinge svinge
to swirl wirbeln wervelen virvle rundt hvirvle
to swish sausen zwiep svisje suse; hvisle; svippe
swollen verschwollen geschwoln gezwollen oppsvulmet opsvulmet
sword Schwert zwaard sverd sv‘rd swerda
swore schwor zwoer svor
TAKE tak TAKA
tale Erz„hlung (meise) (vertelling) (fortelling) tal, (fort‘lling) tala
tame zahm zamn tam tam tam tama
tar Teer teer tj‘re tj‘re terwja
TARN tjern tj”rn, tjarn
teat/tit Zitze zizke tepel (brystvorte) tit
teeth Z„hne tanden tenner t‘nder tanç
ten zehn zen tien ti ti tehun
to thank danken dankn danken takke takke çanka
that daá dos dass det
to thaw tauen dooien tine t› çauja
the der/die/das dem, der, di ,dos de, het den, det, de den, det, de ç
THEIR (ihr) seier deres deres çierra
there dort dort(n) daar der der çar
therein darin daarin deri deri
thereunder darunter daaronder derunder? derunder?
THEY sie sei zij, ze de de çeir
thick dick dik dik tykk tyk çikk
thief Dieb dief tyv tyv çeuba
thin dnn din dun tynn tynd çunnu
thine, thy dein dein din dine ç¡na
thing Ding (zach) ding ting ting çengas
to think denken denkn denken tenke t‘nke çank
third dritte driter derde tredje tredje
thirst Durst dorscht dorst t›rst t›rst çursta
this dies dos dit (s†)
thistle Distel distel tistel tidsel çistila
thole Ruderdolle †retold çulla
thorn Dorn doorn torn torn, tj›rn çurnu
THORPE Dorf dorf dorp çorp
thou du (gij) du du çu
thought dachte/gedacht gedank dacht/gedacht tanke t‘nkte/t‘nkt
thousand tausend toiznt duizend tusen tusind ç£sundi
THRALL trell tr‘l çr‘ll
thrasher/thresher Drescher dorser t‘rsker
three drei drei drie tre tre çr¡
THRIFT (Sparsamkeit) (spaarzaamheid) (sparsommelighed) (sparsommelighet) çrift
throng Gedr„nge gedrang trengsel tr‘ngsel
throstle/thrush Drossel trost drossel çrustl¢
to throttle drosseln trottle
through/thru durch durch door (igennem) çairk
thumb Daumen duim tommel tommelfinger dumba
thunder Donner duner donder torden torden çonder
to tickle kitzeln kizln kietelen kile, tiltale (kildre) kitil¢
tide Gezeiten getijden tidevann tidevand t¡ç¡
tight Dicht dicht tett t‘t çihta
tinder Zunder tonder t›nder
to zu zu te (til) (til)
toe Zehe teen t† t† taih¡
token Zeichen (simen) teken tegn tegn taikna
tongs Zange tang tang tang tang¢
tongue Zunge zung tong tunge tunge tung¢n
tooth Zahn zon tand tann tend tanç
tough z„h taai dr›j t hu
true treu trouw (sand) tr£
twelve zw”lf zwelf twaalf tolv tolv
twenty zwanzig zwanzik twintig tjue tyve
twine Zwirn tvinning tvinde
UGLY (h„álich) (mies) (lelijk) ekkel (h‘slig) uggligr
un- un- um- on- u- u-
under unter unter onder under under under
up auf oif op, uit opptur op
us uns uns ons oss os unsaz, unk
to wad wattieren
to wade waten waden vade vade wada
wader Watvogel wader vadefugl vadefugl
wafer Waffel wafel vaffel
to wag wackeln waggelen (vralte) bev‘ge
wain Wagen wagen vogn vogn wagna
to wait warten wartn wachten vente vente ward‘
to wake wecken wekn wekken v†kne v†g(n)e wak”
walnut Walnuá welschener nus walnoot valn›tt valn›d
walrus Walross walrus hvalross hvalros
WAND (Stab) (schtekl) v†nd vondr
to wander wandeln wandern wandelen vandre vandre
to WANT willen weln willen, wensen mangle mangle vanta
warm Warm waremn warm varm varm warma
to warn warnen worenen waarschuwen advare mot advare warno
wart Warze wrat vorte vorte wart¢n
to wash waschen waschn wassen vaske vaske waska
wasp Wespe wesp wesp veps hveps wabs¢
water Wasser waser water (vann) (vand) watar
LAT way Weg weg weg vei vej VIA
WEAK schwacht schwach zwak svak svag veikr
weasel Wiesel wezel v‘sel wisul¢n
weather Wetter weter weer v‘r vejr wedra
to weave weben weven veve v‘ve weba
web (Netz) geweb web, weefsel vev v‘v
week Woche woch week uke uge wik¢n
to weigh wiegen wegn wiegen veie veje wega
welcome willkommen verwelkomen velkomst velkommen
welfare Wohlfahrt welvaart velferd velf‘rd welo+fara
werewolf Werwolf varulv varulv wera+wulfa
west West (meirew) westen vest vest west
whale Wal walfisch walvis hval hval hwala
what was wos water hva hvad hwat
wheat Weizen wat hvete hvede hwaitija
when wenn wen wanneer enda hvorn†r
which welcher welcher welk(e) hvilke(n) hvilken
while Weile weile hwil¢
to whine (heulen) kwetschn huilen wain¢
WHISK (kwast) (visp) visk viska
WHITE weiss weis wit hvitt hvit hvirfla
white weiá weis wit hvit hvid hweita
whom wem wemen wie hvem hvem
whore Hure hoere hore hore h¢r¢n
why wieso hoezo hvorfor hvorfor
wide weit wijd vidstrakt (bred) weida
widow Witwe (almone) weduwe (enke) widuw¢n
wife Weib weib wijf weiba
WIGHT (fyr) vigr
wild wild wild wild vill vild welçija
will Wille wil vil vil wel
to win gewinnen gewinen winnen vinne vinde wunj¢, wenj¢
wind Wind wint wind vind vind wenda
WINDOW vindu vindue vindauga
LAT wine Wein wein wijn vin vin
WING (Flgel) (fligl) (vleugel) vinge vinge v‘ngr
to wink zwinkern winkn blunk blinke
winter Winter winter winter vinter vinter wentr
wise weise wijs vis vis weisa
to wish wnschen winschn wensen ›nske ›nske
wolf Wolf wolf wolf ulv ulv wulfa
wonder Wunder wunder wonder under under wundra
wool Wolle wol wol ull uld wullo
word Wort wort woord ord ord wurda
work Werk werk v‘rk werk-, wurk-
world Welt welt wereld verden verden
worm Wurm worem worm orm orm wurma
worth Wert wert waarde verdi v‘rd werça
would wollte/wrden wolt werd/geworden ville/villet
wound Wunde wund wond (s†r) wunda
wreck Wrack wrak vrak vrag
yacht Jacht iacht jacht lustb†t, yacht lystb†d; lystyacht jag¢n
yarn Garn garn garen garn garn garna
yea(h) ja jo ja ja ja
year Jahr jor jaar †r †r j ra
yell gellen gillen hyle gella
yellow gelb gel geel gul gul gelwa
yet jetzt (nu) (enn†) (endnu) jet
to yodel jodeln jodle jodle
yoke Joch ioch jok †k (†g) juka
yon jener gene (om) hin
young jung ingl jung ung ung junga
NOTE ENGLISH GERMAN JIDDISCH DUTCH NORWEGIAN DANISH Germanic root Old Norse root Latin root

Main source: Oxford English Dictionary, ed. 1964

Genetic tree of West Germanic[edit]

The internal grouping of the West Germanic languages is still unresolved (see e.g. Ringe's recent book "From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic"), but the tree as (formerly) given, which splits Anglo-Frisian against Old High German/Old Saxon/Old Low Franconian is certainly wrong. The proper division is almost certainly between OHG and all the other languages (Ringe's "Northern West Germanic" grouping). The basic reason for this is that the Northern West Germanic languages share a number of innovations that are not present in OHG:

  1. The so-called "Einheitsplural" (unified plural ending of verbs in -ath)
  2. The development of Class III weak verbs into a relic class consisting of four verbs (*sagjan, *hugjan, *habjan, *libjan)
  3. The split of the Class II weak verb ending -ō- into -ō-/-ōja-
  4. Possibly, the plural ending -as of a-stem nouns
  5. Possibly, the so-called Ingvaeonic nasal spirant law

The second item -- the development of Class III weak verbs -- seems particularly important as it is such a specific change and because the developments in northern WG vs. OHG were radically different. According to Ringe, Class III was actually two different classes in Proto-Germanic: (1) a stative class with endings -ja/-ai in the present and no linking vowel in the past; (2) a "factitive" class with endings -ā/-ai in the present and a linking vowel -a in the past. It's likely that both of these classes persisted down through Proto-West-Germanic. Essentially what happened is:

  1. The northern languages moved all factitive verbs, and all stative verbs other than the four previously mentioned, into Class II (or occasionally Class I?). The remaining four verbs keep the original stative endings.
  2. OHG unified the factitive and stative verbs and generalized the -ai ending (which later developed to -ẽ) as the only ending for all forms of both present and past.

Benwing (talk) 02:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The linguistic evidence is not the issue here. The question is: what is the predominant view in the literature? - that is what the article should reflect. I am not convinced (and a single reference to Ringe won't do it) that the traditional view is less widely supported than the one you cite. Everyone can see some problems with the traditional view (in that sense, everyone agrees it's "certainly wrong", though I think that is a misleading way to put it, since all prehistoric linguistic groupings are by definition based on problematic and incomplete evidence), but that doesn't mean there's a greater consensus for NWGmc or that NWGmc is "certainly right" or even "certainly a better hypothesis". Even if those of us who contribute to this article agreed it was "certainly right" (and I agree there are interesting arguments in favour of it) I don't see that the literature has yet come round to that view. You'd need at several more authorities to make it even arguable that this is a widespread view amongst linguists, let alone the consensus.
Having said that, though, I agree that the diachronic table as it stands is unsatisfactory: the top row for West Gmc doesn't remotely represent the literature either. Hardly any linguists use the term South Germanic; you don't have proto-languages with only a single descendant - and who uses "Proto-Saxon" anyway?; how can two Frankish dialects be grouped separately at this level when their main difference (the sound shift) didn't occur till later?; Low Franconian is closer to English than to Central Franconian? I could go on. You won't find a grouping remotely like this in any of the standard works on the grouping of the Gmc languages - this is effectively OR. I suggest someone source the groupings from a reliable standard work and cite it as a source. The disclaimer that the groupings are controversial simply doesn't excuse the muddle presented here. As for the position of Lombardic in the row below, it breaks the rules of tree diagrams and is completely contrary to the consensus view in the literature that Lombardic is West Germanic - OR again. --Pfold (talk) 18:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure that the "consensus" groups Old Saxon and OHG against Anglo-Frisian? I seriously doubt that. I've seen the "northwest germanic" grouping mentioned in plenty of places. You also have to consider that some of the older sources are confused about the fact that shared retentions don't count for anything when looking at groupings. If anything, we should present a "consensus" that inserts no groupings at all between West Germanic and Anglo-Frisian. As for Proto-Saxon etc., I agree these are more or less neologisms, although there's in fact nothing wrong with "Proto-X" referring to a single language (e.g. "Proto-Norse"; Kortlandt speaks of "Proto-Irish" in [2]). As it stands, these are simply place-fillers for earlier stages of the languages in question, to avoid creating a clade where none exists. Benwing (talk) 23:05, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
BTW When I wrote the above comments I hadn't looked much at OLF and it does look like it doesn't belong with Old Saxon and Anglo-Frisian, e.g. it doesn't have characteristics 1, 4 or 5 given above. This would lead to a potential "Ingvaeonic" grouping of Anglo-Frisian and Old Saxon. However I'm not sure whether this is supported in the literature. As for "South Germanic", this was in the last version of the chart and I agree it doesn't belong. The question is, what do you call e.g. the stage of OHG in 400 AD? It's not clear that terms like "OHG" are generally thought to extend that far back. With OE, I've seen terms like "Primitive English" and "Proto-Anglo-Saxon" to refer to pre-OE of 400 AD or so. Benwing (talk) 23:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I went ahead and changed the tree so that Old Saxon and Anglo-Frisian are grouped in an Ingvaeonic node, and used the term "Primitive X" to describe the pre-written stages of OHG, Old Saxon and OLF/Old Frankish. Benwing (talk) 03:42, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible solution[edit]

Low Franconian and Low Saxon are two separate groups. The language of the Hanseatic League was Low German and this included the Low Franconian and Low Saxon varieties. Historically, there were no two separate languages, but there was a so-called dialect continuum.

Making a difference between High German and the Low German (including Dutch) is already questionable in both ways, but separating the Low German in two different categories (Dutch and Low German) is simply incorrect.

Frisian English Dutch German
dei day dag Tag
rein rain regen Regen
wei way weg Weg
neil nail nagel Nagel
tsiis cheese kaas Käse
tsjerke church kerk Kirche
tegearre together samen zusammen
wiet wet nat nass
sibbe sibling verwante Verwandte
kaai key sleutel Schlüssel
ha west have been ben geweest bin gewesen
twa skiep two sheep twee schapen zwei Schafe
yndie(d) indeed inderdaad in der Tat
ús us ons uns
hynder horse paard Pferd
brea bread brood Brot
hier hair haar Haar
ear ear oor Ohr
doar door deur Tür
grien green groen Grün
stiel steel staal Stahl
read red rood Rot
giel (Sf. Jeel) yellow geel Gelb
swiet sweet zoet süβ
troch through door durch
hawwe have hebben haben
tinke thinking denken denken
lyts little klein klein

In this table you will find English and Frisian on the one side, and German and Dutch on the other side. The so-called Low Saxon or Low German varieties should be somewhere between the Dutch and German language. I propose you merge Low Franconian and Low Saxon, otherwise you need at least three new linguistic groups for Frisian as well. Kind regards --Kening Aldgilles (talk) 00:41, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Low Franconian takes an intermediate position between these two. It doesn't take part in innovations 1, 3 and 4, only partly in 5 and completely in 2. It also has the diphthongisation of WG ē and ō to ie and uo, as does Old High German, but it shares the monophthongisation of WG ai and au to ē and ō with Old Saxon (and if monophthongisation in general is concerned, with Old Frisian as well). It also seems to have the shift io > ia, at least judging from the form thiadi, which unifies it with Old Frisian against Old Saxon and Old High German which both retain io (thioda, diota). It also shares the loss of intervocalic -h- with Old Frisian and Old English, which is retained in Old Saxon and Old High German. Another feature it shares with Old Frisian and Old English is the weakening of unstressed i to e, which appears intermittently in Old Low Franconian texts. On the other hand, it loses initial h- before consonants, like Old High German.
So it seems that there is no real specific feature of Low Franconian that sets it out as a unique branch, but it also seems strange to use any connection to Central Franconian as evidence against a distinct identity. The Franks were not a unified people, they were a union of many smaller groups, so there is no reason why those groups could not have had different dialects. There are very few sound changes that are completely unique to Low Franconian, but the early appearance of final devoicing and the change -hs- > -ss- may speak for an emerging identity as a distinct dialect, as does the relative lack of distinction between the strong and weak declensions (including the complete merger of feminine o-stems and on-stems). I think the most sensible thing to say is that Low Franconian is a transition dialect, which takes a central position among Old Saxon, Old Frisian and Old High German and shares certain features with all three without being grouped distinctly with any one. CodeCat (talk) 10:44, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your examples.
At least for Frisian speaking people who also have knowledge of Dutch/German, both languages seem to be pretty much the same. The language of the Hanseatic League was Low German/Dutch, spoken in a dialect continuum. It sounds the same, looks the same, and has a common history and maybe therefor should be treated as one group.
Different from English and Frisian, the Low German varieties later took over the Nasal developments. The examples given give a good impression. Kind regards --Kening Aldgilles (talk) 19:33, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kening. I've been out of the country for 5 weeks and just got back. Can you explain more clearly what your concerns are with the current layout and what you want it to look like instead? However, before proposing anything I'd suggest you look somewhat more into the actual linguistic reasons why the Germanic languages are grouped as they are. You are arguing primarily on surface similarities of various words in the modern languages, which is not a valid way of grouping languages historically and suggests you don't have a background in historical linguistics. Benwing (talk) 00:25, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New diagram: check language names / ethnonyms?[edit]

Hello!

I translated File:Einteilung der Germanen nach Maurer.de.svg from German to English File:Einteilung der Germanen nach Maurer.en.svg – as far as I could. It illustrates the subdivion of the Germanic languages and peoples according to :de:Friedrich Maurer.

Would someone like to check if the names of peoples and languages are correct? Especially my translation of "Germanen" (Latin "Germani", i.e. members of a Germanic people). According to the English wiktionary, it is "Germans", too...

The other translations (English and Latin ones) are taken from the English wikipedia, and I think that they are correct. Thanks in advance. -- MaEr (talk) 08:39, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Diachronic[edit]

Norwegian is placed as a descendant of the Old East Norse, therefore, the Old West Norse should be moved one space to accommodate the Old Norwegian. Also, Old Gutnish should be occupying both the Early Middle ages and the Middle ages spaces. Mmasalleras (talk) 13:07, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Norwegian is 'east Norse' in the same way that English is Romance, brought on by foreign influence. The difference though is that the differences between Danish and Norwegian are small, so Danish influence didn't affect Norwegian in a very serious manner. I think it's best to say that modern Norwegian descends from both Old Norwegian and Old Danish to some degree. CodeCat (talk) 18:44, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just as English was heavily influenced by Latin and Norman, but it isn't Romance, Norwegian isn't an East Scandinavian language nor descends(mainly) from Old East Norse, as the table incorrectly shows. Also, [Early] Old Gutnish doesn't descend from Old East Norse, they were contemporary and already showing clear differences by the 10th c., something that the table isn't displaying. Mmasalleras (talk) 02:13, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Madagascar[edit]

Madagascar shouldn't be coloured on the map because English is no longer official there (and actually not very known). Aaker (talk) 21:06, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Classification of English[edit]

One new study reports that English could/should be classified as North Germanic. http://www.apollon.uio.no/english/articles/2012/4-english-scandinavian.html Inge (talk) 13:09, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That would ignore all the West Germanic features, which all the North Germanic languages lack. However, it's not terribly surprising that there are some similarities, considering that Old English arose from the Germanic dialects of Denmark. CodeCat (talk) 13:52, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The claim is definitively debunked on Language Log --Pfold (talk) 12:20, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no expert in this field, but as a Scot it doesn't required you to be an expert to know that Scots English dialects display a huge amount of Norse vocabulary- and a few grammatical features. At what point people want to start drawing lines isn't clear to me, but the considerable Scandinavian history & influence in/on Scotland is undeniable. 92.40.253.86 (talk) 11:17, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

dialect[edit]

If one understands dialect to mean variant forms of one language used in a a more or less circumscribable area, Franconian (and others) is as much a dialect of German as Yorkshire is a dialect of English. The only Lowland Scots that I have ever read was used by Mary Queen of Scots in her letters. It is so similar to English that it is quite easy to read. It is much easier to read than, say, Beowulf or even Wulfstan's Sermon to the English (11th cent.). I find it difficult think of it as anything other than a language with the same history of development, so a dialect of English. Pamour (talk) 13:16, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Linguists generally don't distinguish between dialects and languages. After all, consider your first sentence. "Variant forms of one language". What is one language? That in itself isn't well defined, especially in the face of a dialect continuum like the one that exists in mainland West Germanic. Dutch on one end and Alemannic or Bavarian on the other are not mutually intelligible, but there is no clear-cut border between them; rather there are gradual changes as you travel from one area to the other, and in each area, the most intelligible dialects are those closer to that area, while those further away are harder to understand. So linguists normally consider the difference between dialect and language to be a matter of perspective and often use the two terms interchangeably (for example, they call the Germanic languages a dialect of Indo-European). A more neutral term that is also used is "language variety", which implies that everything is just a kind of language in its own right rather than a dialect of something. CodeCat (talk) 17:00, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest the Lowland Scots of Burns would tax you a bit more, as a Glaswegian (a dialect largely fairly light on Scots vocab)I can't make head nor tail of it.

And I agree with CodeCat, that in linguistics a dialect is merely a variation that is/has been at point on a continuum. If you really want to push it, you can measure mutual intelligibility... but often it seems that arguments around "language" versus "dialect" are emotionally-driven political identity arguments rather than scientific ones. 92.40.253.86 (talk) 11:11, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Characteristics & Standardisation[edit]

Surely the standardised dialects aren't the best yardstick for taxonomy? This paragraph is also very bad at getting across what it actually means. If you are familiar with comparative linguistics, a few readings gets you there, but I fear it'll read like gibberish to someone new to the subject. 92.40.253.86 (talk) 11:05, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why is such a crappy, questionable product such as Ethnologue.com being used?[edit]

Why is such a backdoor application such as http://www.ethnologue.com used as a reference. Many of their contentions about language are primitive at best. It just a shoddy product and yet it is cited as if it has some authority and as if it is viable research which it is clearly not. It is the intellectual equivalent of using already soiled toilet paper in a bathroom environment... Is its use on Wikipedia the result of someone furthering their business interest in this less than standard product? Stevenmitchell (talk) 02:08, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd hesitate before ascribing commercial interests. It's far more likely it's the sloppy lack of research - and, indeed, education - that is at the root of it. Someone edits a Wikipedia page with their belief and when eventually challenged to find a "notable source" they go to Ethnologue.com and state that it's outside of Wikipedia and "trustworthy" and then camp until everyone else gives up in disgust.

Welcome to Wikipedia!88.90.184.135 (talk) 21:55, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That figure[edit]

According to this diagram, Fife is a multilingual area while Lewis isn't. As anyone who has even visited these places could tell you, let alone lived in them, this is grossly inaccurate. Lewis is an English-speaking island, with a significant number of Gaelic speakers. Fife speaks English and is monolingual. Similarly, any attempts to claim that Lothian and Borders, in 2013, speak "Scots" is misguided. The language is much closer to English than it is to the Scots of 70 years back, when it was genuinely a distinct and distinctive dialect (if not a separate language). Given these offensively gross errors, I'm exceedingly loathe to trust anything plotted on this chart at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.90.184.135 (talk) 21:53, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Examples of verb second order for English[edit]

Added 'Pop Goes the Weasel' and 'Able was I ere I saw Elba' as further examples. I've never heard the two examples that were previously the only ones cited, but I am sure the two I added are better known. Furthermore, both are already referenced within Wikipedia. Meaning of Fife (talk) 23:34, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014 what about Flemish[edit]

I don't see any mention of Flemish/Vlaams in the Article. Is there an assumption that Nederlands is a common language between the Dutch and the Belgians? Even between the Flemish provinces there are variations in dialectic words and between Dutch and Flemish even the basic alphabet has phonic differences e.g. "g" takes on a different sounding. The diminutive in Dutch is an "icke" whereas in Vlaams more likely "tje" Also the influence of the Monarchy/Aristocracy also sees a lot of borrowed French words adapted into Flemish e.g. a small present would be cadeautje but in Dutch geschenk 74.103.167.2 (talk) 15:30, 1 May 2014 (UTC) CED (Not scientific input - just a Celt raising a few questions) Both examples are actually reversed. Also, besides the obvious pronunciation and day-to-day seperateness of 2 nations, both everyday languages are relatively similar and mutually intelligible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.213.38.233 (talk) 00:20, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

South Germanic languages[edit]

Why there is no such way for South Germanic languages?

If you look at South Germanic, you will see why. --Pfold (talk) 21:47, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Diachronic Table[edit]

I think the diachronic table needs to be replaced by something explicitly based on a published source. As it stands the table is in breach of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. There are problems which cannot be fixed simply by editorial tweaking:

  • The idea that the periodisation of all the dialects can be aligned within a single grid of period divisions - the divisions used are often in conflict with the articles on the individual languages
  • The use of terms which are never used in the literature, such as Early New Central German, Primitive Saxon.

I don't see how the job can be done in a table - I think we need to source a suitable diagram, or, if we can't find a copyright-free diagram that represents current thinking, create a new diagram based on a single published source. Something like the one on p. 49 of Keller's The German Language, say. --Pfold (talk) 11:32, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bad organization and missing information[edit]

The article needs serious rewriting. I'm a fan of historical linguistics or philology, but there's way too much historical information and it's sprinkled through every section in the article, without regard for whether it's actually helpful. We need more information on the phonology, morphology, and syntax of modern Germanic languages.

For instance, the Phonology section should discuss the phonemic inventories and phonological features of modern Germanic languages, like Slavic languages § Common features and Indo-Aryan languages § Phonology. The sound changes that happened between Proto-Germanic and the old Germanic languages belong in another section, because they don't really help a reader understand how modern English, Dutch, Standard German, Norwegian, Danish, and Icelandic are different. The real differences between the modern Germanic languages have to do with presence or absence of phonemes (the dorsal fricative /x/ and semivowel /w/, postalveolars, affricates, front rounded vowels) and different phonological features (pitch accent, vowel length, diphthongs, different features of fortis and lenis obstruents, greater or lesser vowel reduction). More on these things is needed.

The Characteristics section is also confusing. We need to distinguish between features that happen to be important for classifying the Germanic languages as a separate branch of the Indo-European family, and features that are actually rare or unique to the Germanic languages as compared with other languages around the world. The Germanic consonant shift isn't a unique feature, because it results in the same voiced and voiceless stops and fricatives that are found in other language families around the world. Similarly, large vowel inventories are found in other language families, and so is vowel reduction and a present-past contrast. Probably some features listed are typologically distinctive, but I'm not sure which.

I may work on fixing these problems, but help would be appreciated. — Eru·tuon 06:58, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The linguistic contact of the Viking settlers of the Danelaw with the Anglo-Saxons left traces in the English language[edit]

There were never a vikingish language:

In Bósa saga ok Herrauðs is to read:

  • Herraud's best friend was Bósi, the younger son of a former viking named Thvari or Bryn-Thvari by Brynhild, a former shieldmaiden and a daughter of King Agnar of Nóatún.
  • Bósi was a rough boy who was eventually outlawed for maiming some other folk in a ball-game. Herraud, discontented, gained permission from his father, over Sjód's objections, be allowed to set off on a Viking expedition with five ships

There is, however, no such thing as a former Norseman, mentioned in the sources. Dan Koehl (talk) 22:49, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Egil Skallagrimsson saga: Björn var farmaður mikill, var stundum í víking, en stundum í kaupferðum; Björn var hinn gervilegasti maður. (english: Björn was a great traveller; sometimes as viking, sometimes as tradesman.

So, a Norseman could be a viking for some time, and he could be a tradesman (or a baker, or a shepherd) for some time. But not all tradesmen, bakers, shepherds and vikings were Norseman.

Norseman spoke norse, but norse vikings did not speak vikingish, and norse shepherds did not speak shepherdish or bakerish.

Norsemen had norse culture, but there was no norse viking, baker or shepherd culture.

I think its important to remind people today about the term Norsemen, an accepted term by historians and archelogists, referring to people from the north, present Scandinavia. This term does not have any certain time limit, the Norsemen were norse in years, 400, 500, 657, 749, 803, 950, 1066 and 1100. Norsemen is a true ethnical group, for some reason neglected on Wikipedia. Whenever the word viking is mentioned, it can correctly be replaced by the term Norsemen in 95% of the cases. Norsemen are described in other Wikipedia languages, and since the english Wikipedia should be written from a global point of view, the term Norse and Norsemen should not be treated different.

The first documented use of the word viking is made by Orosius, written in latin, and translated into old english. There is to read about Alexander the Great´s father, Philip II of Macedonia: Philippus vero post longam obsidionem, ut pecuniam quam obsidendo exhauserat, praedando repararet, piraticam adgressus est. translated into: ac he scipa gegaderade, and i vicingas wurdon. In this time the word pirat was not used in the english language, the latin piraticam was directly translated to vicingus.

Interestingly enough, theres stories in the sagas, describing arabic piates, and they were in the sagas referred to, as vikings. = Vikings could be arabs practising piracy, and vikings could be macedonian kings practising piracy, but peaceful norse farmers, and their wifes, were never, ever, described as vikings before 1900.

For over 1 000 years, viking was nothing else than an old-english translation of the latin word pirate.

A macedonian king will never, ever, become scandinavian. An arabic pirat will never become scandinavian.

But a norseman was scandinavian, and the present scandinavians are descendants of Norsemen, according to historians and archelogists.

The sentence The linguistic contact of the Viking settlers of the Danelaw with the Anglo-Saxons left traces in the English language reflects a very poor knowledge in what viking actually means. As well as poor knowledge in the term Norsemen.

'Viking is a controversial term, Norsemen is not. For some reason, some people absolutely wants to call my ancestors vikings, which is historically incorrect and besides, unpolite. The Scandinavians as a an ethnic group, is more or less the same as Norsemen, Theres no problem whatsoever to use the correct term.


Dan Koehl (talk) 23:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is an issue regarding the difference in usage between the terms in English and in modern Scandinavian languages. Sorry if you don't like that usage but we must follow the English language version here. Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:35, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but we must follow the global point of view, with whatever language. We don't know how Koreans, Kenyans, or Tasmanians interprete the word viking, but for sure the word Norsemen is the correct term for the ethnical group of Scandinavian people. Dan Koehl (talk) 23:59, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If by "the global view" you mean a usage which is divergent from that of the English language, no that is fundamentally not correct. Mutt Lunker (talk) 00:10, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quebec shouldn't be colored in the map[edit]

Quebec official language is French, so shouldn't be colored on the map as a germanic language territory.

Per the legend, the map is by country, not by further subdivisions, and "where a Germanic language is the first language of the majority of the population", which it is in Canada. Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:44, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A world map is too large for a good illustration. Agree also with "Quebec", today's countries in the entire world provide poor educational understanding. Boeing720 (talk) 23:36, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Limburgish[edit]

Never heard of anyone recognizing it as a separate language on the same level and comparable to German, Swedish or English. Its a dialect of Dutch.Ernio48 (talk) 19:13, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or Dutch is a dialect of Limburgish. It's unlinguistic to call a language a dialect of another. Linguists only recognise speech varieties. CodeCat (talk) 19:42, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

750 BC until 1 AD map[edit]

From this map, one gets the impression that central Europe was populated from the North. I strongly doubt this. I do however know that Finnish-Ugrian languages came from the East, split up in Russia and became the Magyars and Finnish which at least explains why Finnish, Estonian and Hungarian are related. In any case, was Scandinavia Populated from south to north. (With a possible excepton of the Sami peole, who came from the East, I think). Boeing720 (talk) 23:32, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The map regards Germanic tribes, not humanity as a whole. Mutt Lunker (talk) 00:06, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting table , expanded[edit]

Frisian English Dutch German Danish Swedish
dei day dag Tag dag dag
rein rain regen Regen regn regn
wei way weg Weg vej väg
neil nail nagel Nagel nagel nagel
tsiis cheese kaas Käse ost ost
tsjerke church kerk Kirche kirke kyrka
tegearre together samen zusammen sammen tilsammans
wiet wet nat nass våd våt
sibbe sibling verwante Verwandte søskende syskon
kaai key sleutel Schlüssel nøgle nyckel
ha west have been ben geweest bin gewesen har været har varit
twa skiep two sheep twee schapen zwei Schafe to får två får
yndie(d) indeed inderdaad in der Tat sandelig verkligen
ús us ons uns os oss
hynder horse paard Pferd hest häst
brea bread brood Brot brød bröd
hier hair haar Haar hår hår
ear ear oor Ohr øre öra
doar door deur Tür dør dörr
grien green groen Grün grøn grön
stiel steel staal Stahl stål stål
read red rood Rot rød röd
giel (Sf. Jeel) yellow geel Gelb gul gul
swiet sweet zoet süβ sød söt
troch through door durch igennem genom
hawwe have hebben haben ha ha
tinke thinking denken denken tænke tänka
lyts little klein klein lille liten

Just for possible use or interest Boeing720 (talk) 23:59, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hellenistic languages - only Greek exist[edit]

User:Pfold Under the Indo-European languages exists fife subgroups

  1. Germanic languages
  2. Slavonic & Baltic languages
  3. Latin-based "Romance" (Italic are a smaller part of Romance language, which i smaller than Germanic languages. However all Romance lang. are larger !
  4. Indo-Iranian
  5. Hellenic languages - of which only modern Greek still is spoken.

All five groups are equally related to the Indo-European base. (All Indo-European languages have the same classes of words (although some are discussed as words of classes or not, like atricles and numbers)

  • nouns, pronouns (personal nouns) their describing adjectives (sometimes are articles also included, and exist in all Indo-European languages.)
  • verbs, their describibg adverbs
  • prepositions (are not included in languages like Hungarian, Finnish and Estonian)
  • numbers (whether of class of its own or not differs, but both "five" and "fifth" can be translated directly to any other Indo-European language.
  • conjuctions (words like "and", "or")
  • interjections ("Yes !", "Ouch !")

This applies also to the Greek language. (The alphabet used has nothing to do with linguistic relations). About the lead-sentence which mentions all sub-branches of the Indo-European languages - either it has to mention all five, or only state "Germanic languages is one of five Indo-European branches" - or something in line with that. Boeing720 (talk) 00:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reply also to another user. (IF using Italic, then is Germanic larger; if using Romance, then they are larger than Germanic. The sentence listed all sub-branches from the largest to the smallest. Forgot Hellenistic languages - iow. Greek language, and made a blur of the sorting order by gathered speakers. Boeing720 (talk) 00:50, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are more than five branches of Indo-European. Read up on it before making a show. CodeCat (talk) 11:56, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User:CodeCat Directly below Indo-Eurpean ? In any case was my contribution an improvement, if you are correct. Bu I do not count sub-branches of sub-branches like Scandinavian languages or Iberian languages. I added the one I knew about. I'm talking abot the lead. Please also see my proposal here below. Boeing720 (talk) 13:38, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is obviously more but all of those are like Greek "stand-alone", and are smaller than Greek, I think. Also Albanian and Celtic appear to like Greek be "stand-alone" languages directly under the Indo-European main tree. And in the east several others. Armenian is the only one I've heared about. Boeing720 (talk) 22:20, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by "stand-alone"? If you mean that they are not a sub-branch, then the answer is "it depends". The interrelatedness of various branches is still an ongoing debate, and only Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian have widespread support. Italo-Celtic is supported by some but is still relatively unaccepted. Greek has also been connected to other branches, especially Armenian. CodeCat (talk) 22:30, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But in Europe there are three major sub-branches today , Italic cannot be used about "native speakers today"

What gives you that idea? More people speak Italic languages today than do Germanic. CodeCat (talk) 22:30, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The major five groups of Indo-Eurpean languages (and their sizes)[edit]

Indo-European languages are divided into the following five sub-groups (of which this article deals with one of them - Germanic languages)

  1. Indo-Iranian languages. Examples - Hindu(stani), Farsi or Iranian, Bengali
  2. Romance languages. Examples - Italian, Portuguese, Languages spoken in Spain except Basque, Romanian, French
  3. Balto-Slavic languages. Examples - Russian, Latvian, Bulgarian, Polish, Slovakian, Serbo-Croatiac, Czech, Ukranian, Lithuanian
  4. Hellenistic languages - of which only modern Greek still exists
  5. Germanic languages - Examples - English, German, Dutch, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian

All of these sub-branches (except perhaps Hellenistic) can be divided further. Balto-Slavic , can be split in at least North-Slavic (Russian, Polish), South-Slavic (Bulgaian, Slovenian) Baltic languages (Latvian, Lithuanian). Romance languages can be divided into Italic languages and Iberian languages. And we also have West-Germanic and East-Germanic and somewhere also Scandinavian languagers etc. Any objections so far ?

Then we have - regarding this article, Germanic languages an early lead sentence (with germanic languages = it )

  • "It is the Indo-European subdivision spoken third most often as a native language, behind Italic and Indo-Iranian, and ahead of the Balto-Slavic languages."

Since this clearly is a comparing statement, must the comparison be true. But fist - the Hellenistc subbranch is totally forgotten. Although there is no doubts about modern Greek as being an Indo-European , Hellenistc language (without relation to any of the other four sub-branches). If we must continue to compare the five sub-branches, must we also mention either "Hellenistic languages" or "Greek". Objections this far ? But putting the Germanic languages behind Italic languages, in a question of size, number of current day speakers, is wrong. If however avoid Italic languages (which is a sub-branch of a sub-branch really) and use all languages based on Latin - or Romance languages, then the sentence will possibly be true.

Proposal: Either just mentioning Germanic Languages to be one out of five sub-branches of Indo-European languages - or change the sentence in question to

  • "It is the Indo-European subdivision spoken third most often as a native language, behind Indo-Iranian, Romance and ahead of the Balto-Slavic and Hellenistic languages."

And preferably by using a source which can especially show that Germanic languages is smaller than Romance languages. In any case is Italic languages only a part of the larger Romance language. And Hellenistic languages (=Greek) are forgotten. How this blur emerged is a good question. Boeing720 (talk) 13:23, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is difficult to follow your various points in this section and those above and, to the extent I do, they are riddled with factual errors, misconceptions and illogicality. The same goes for your posts on my talk page. For instance, and not the only example, Italic languages include Romance ones, not the other way round. Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:25, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But please Mutt Lunker - I presume you're talking about how languages spread from Rome and out (or something in line with that).But that's NOT the issue here ! I'm talking about all languages with a base in Latin, a wider group of (modern) languages. Like Italian, French, Romanian and all languages spoken on the Iberian peninsula except Basque. How many speak Italic languages today ? Are Italic languages excluded from the Romance languages ? (by the way, I would rather call them "Latin languages" or "Roman languages" - end by the way). Then please read the sentence (as in article currently) -
  • "It (meaning Germanic languages) is the Indo-European subdivision spoken THIRD most often as a native language, behind Italic and Indo-Iranian, and ahead of the Balto-Slavic languages."
I can believe the Indo-Iranian sub-branch of Indo-European languages is the largest such sub-branch (inculding Hindu, Farsi (Iranian), Bengal etc) and possibly also Romance languages - but if exluding Spanish (Castellian Spanish), French and Portuguese are naturally Germanic languages ahead. (As you refuse me to change from Italic to Romance in the sentence) The sentence in question has NOTHING what so ever to do with HOW languages has developed through history - it is just about today's situation. A comparing statement. Which has forgotten the Hellenistic sub-branch, but also excludes all Latin based or Romance languages, which are NOT Italic as well. This makes the sentence in question A LIE !!! Have I still failed to explain the problem with the current formulation ? Boeing720 (talk) 22:00, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What the sentence says is that Italic and Indo-Iranian are spoken more than Germanic and Balto-Slavic is spoken less. CodeCat (talk) 22:32, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Naturally, exact what I'm saying - but this is an error (regarding the position of Italic languages) ! According to our article Italic languages, are those languages previously spoken in Northern Italy and in the Alps approximately. Hence, they have nothing to do with the current situation, which the sentence in question was dealing with. Germanic languages are spoken by many more, compared to this largely extinguished group. (However if all of today's modern languages which are based on Latin, in other words Italian, French, Spanish, Catalan, Portuguese, Romanian and a few smaller other languages - which here on our Wikipedia are referred to as Romance languages, was compared to the Germanic languages - then it would be a different matter. But I was earlier refused to change Italic languages to Romance languages. I hope this was clear enough ? Boeing720 (talk) 22:18, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Read the article Italic languages more carefully. It's in the very first paragraph of the article. CodeCat (talk) 23:20, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Why change "Italic" to "Romance"? The Romance languages are part of the Italic branch. — Eru·tuon 00:20, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Frisian languages[edit]

Frisian is spoken among half a million people who live on the southern fringes of the North Sea in the Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark. This sentence has no reference. According to this study, mutually intelligibilty between West Frisian and North Frisian is at 38%. Furthermore, there are different ISO codes for the Frisian languages.Sarcelles (talk) 11:41, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Teutonic languages"[edit]

Is "Teutonic languages" a synonym -- or an outdated synonym -- for Germanic languages? --Neitram (talk) 18:32, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's certainly outdated if you ask me.Ernio48 (talk) 18:21, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

English and V2 word order[edit]

I edited the article to say that V2 word order is "largely absent" in English rather than "no longer present" as the article itself already provides numerous counterexamples. I think this may be worth expanding on though, as to me it seems that what is really meant here is that "V2 word order typically sounds unnatural or archaic in modern English, and in some cases may be grammatically incorrect."

I don't know if there's a good source for this anywhere though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A443:F91D:1:E57F:8EF5:E864:13FC (talk) 21:32, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Map[edit]

Quebec should not be colored dark red. English is not its primary language (as we correctly note on the map on the English language) page. Funnyhat (talk) 19:16, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the map is wrong, English is not the language of the majority of the population in Québec. Azerty82 (talk) 21:43, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The caption states, "Countries where the first language of the majority of the population is a Germanic language". Since Quebec isn't an country, and since English is the first language of a majority of people in Canada, the map is correct. BilCat (talk) 04:42, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mistakes in table[edit]

There is a mistake in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_languages#Classification. Modern German and Yiddish are a descendents of Old High German, not Central German. The rest appears correct. Azerty82 (talk) 21:42, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"German groups" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect German groups. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:03, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Germanic groups" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Germanic groups. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:03, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Germanic group" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Germanic group. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:52, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"German group" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect German group. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:52, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Diachronic table[edit]

Sorry to be blunt, but the diachronic table simply does not belong in this article.

  1. It is unsourced.
  2. It contains self-evident nonsense - there are no such terms as "Primitive Upper German", "Old Upper German", "Middle Upper German", "Early New Upper German" in use in the literature
  3. The idea that all these languages have an identical periodisation is self-evidently untenable.
  4. Standard German is not descended from Upper German.
  5. Crimean Gothic is not a descendant of Bible Gothic.

I'm sure a lot of work has gone in to this table, but that's not enough to justify its inclusion. No amount of tweaking is going to rescue it from from WP:OR. --Pfold (talk) 18:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be removed.--Ermenrich (talk) 18:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, this is a case for WP:TNT. Here is btw the earliest version of the table: Special:Permalink/38657486#Diachronic. –Austronesier (talk) 18:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vocab comparison table[edit]

It might help us trim the vocab comparison table if we knew what exactly the purpose of it was. There are a number of cases where the languages in fact use different words, die, starve, for example, or head vs. cognates of Kopf. What is it we are trying to show with this table? Is it sound changes? Common vocab (which would eliminate the two examples I just gave)? Variety? At the moment the thing is far too long to be of any real use and attracts constant additions of some additional word that looks similar in some number of Germanic languages. It might be best to just select a small number of particularly representative items (pronouns and numbers for instance).--Ermenrich (talk) 15:33, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's good to see this bloated table trimmed. Can I suggets, though, that we could do with a couple more verbs? --Pfold (talk) 10:12, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, 2-3 more verbs would be nice. What about incomplete sets like 'moon'? Yiddish has no direct cognate, only the mon- in montik (מאָנטיק). –Austronesier (talk) 10:30, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We should cut moon I guess then - we formerly had “to sing”, which we cut restore, or does anyone know some better verbs?—Ermenrich (talk) 12:15, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak: live; do or go or have from the minor groups; can or must from the pret-pres. ? --Pfold (talk) 12:30, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Does “do” have a Nordic cognate?—Ermenrich (talk) 12:52, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, do has not survived in Nordic.--Berig (talk) 05:06, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently "go" has no cognate in modern Icelandic and Faroese. "To have" would be another example where all the variants would be between v/b as the middle consonant. I'm going to do "to stand" instead.--Ermenrich (talk) 22:08, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've added "can", but I did it with the infinitives as I couldn't find out what the inflected form of, e.g. the Limburgs form was. I assume they're actually all quite a lot more similar to the English than this makes them look.--Ermenrich (talk) 22:23, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why not add a Proto-Germanic reconstruction? It would make sense to show how all the forms are related.--Berig (talk) 05:08, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a reasonable idea to me. I would prefer we use an etymological dictionary like Orel then rather than using Wiktionary though. I'm already sort of unsure about the forms in e.g. Scots for some of the Wiktionary entries.--Ermenrich (talk) 13:59, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I added PGmc. Now the table is too wide though, if anyone knows how to make it narrower. Otherwise, perhaps we could remove Scots, whose status as a language is debatable.--Ermenrich (talk) 22:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Berig: I think something went wrong here[3], you wanted to remove Limburgish and Luxembourgish, but accidentally deleted the Dutch and Low German data columns instead. –Austronesier (talk) 16:42, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I counted the columns, but messed it up.--Berig (talk) 16:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and removed Scots.--Ermenrich (talk) 17:31, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think the German dialects should to go, except perhaps Low German. There are many other Germanic dialects that are at least as quirky as they are.--Berig (talk) 17:39, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the original idea was good. Low German should stay since it is quite a kind of its own and somehow represents the last stage of a (not fully direct, but anyway...) lineage from Old Saxon and Middle Low German. Limburgish and Luxembourgish are nice to have, but too much stuff on the left side pushes everything else out of view when reading on a mobile screen. Yiddish, in spite of its closeness to Standard German should stay, and if it's only to annoy Wexler fans. –Austronesier (talk) 18:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

what about Faroese? It’s very similar to Icelandic and about as widely spoken as Luxembourgish I would assume. I’m also not sure we need Afrikaans.—-Ermenrich (talk) 19:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Faroese is a good candidate for removal. Its written language is actually based on Icelandic.--Berig (talk) 19:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And Norwegian Bokmål is basically written in Danish, so it is not very representative of a native Norwegian development.--Berig (talk) 19:38, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, it sometimes rather accurately said to be Danish spoken in Swedish, and it is easy to see its intermediary position between Swedish and Danish in the table.--Berig (talk) 19:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I removed: Afrikaans, Limburgish, Luxembourgish, and Faroese. The table looks quite a bit more manageable now. Do we want to remove Bokmål as well? It requires a lot of footnotes, I notice...--Ermenrich (talk) 19:45, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessary. I think it looks great now. Thanks Ermenrich!--Berig (talk) 19:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think we could probably add a few more vocab items now without it looking as crazy as before. I notice the only kinship word we have is "daughter" for some reason. Maybe we could add "father" or "mother"? "Word" might also work. Any other words that seem like they could be there? I think we should choose ones that result in a variety of outcomes from sound outcomes.--Ermenrich (talk) 19:51, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead! :-)--Berig (talk) 20:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Geminate glide fortition in North and East Germanic is sexy. Is there any correspondence set that would include all languages here? –Austronesier (talk) 20:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Egg? That's of course a Norse loanword in English though. If that doesn't matter we can use it though...--Ermenrich (talk) 20:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"True" works - it's in every language. It appears "egg" is only attested in Crimean Gothic (as ada). We should try to find something showing the "d" gemination as well. The question is what...--Ermenrich (talk) 20:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to add "egg" with a reconstructed Gothic form and a footnote.--Ermenrich (talk) 21:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've fiddled around with it some more - let me know if you think there's anything else we should add or subtract. If we could find a word that has "-dg-" in English and -kk- in German that also exists in Norse and Gothic that would be great. The obvious words like "ridge", "bridge", "midge", and "edge" all seem to be missing in Gothic.

I was also thinking a clear example of rhoticism might be nice, such as "to hear".--Ermenrich (talk) 22:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the problem in having one or two items without na Gothic cognate - after all, it signals the poor corpus. Oh, and good work, @Ermenrich:. --Pfold (talk) 08:58, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have added 'deep' as an example for *eu. Initially, I wanted to add 'deer' which has *eu and rhotacism, so this would have killed two birds with one stone, but I've left it out because of the semantic shift in English, which requires an additional note. And yes, great job, Ermenrich!. –Austronesier (talk) 11:10, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I went ahead and added "to hear" for rhoticism, but if you know a better word than go ahead and replace it. I had also thought of "deer", but I believe it's missing in Yiddish. There are still a few more phenomena we could illustrate - I'll probably add "ridge" even though it doesn't have a Gothic cognate.
Also, I'm still not entirely convinced that Bokmål is doing a lot on the table. Would anyone object to it being removed? It's mostly just the same as Danish or Swedish.--Ermenrich (talk) 17:36, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have been thinking the same. The risk is however that a Norwegian will take offense sooner or later. --Berig (talk) 17:43, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll wait a bit longer to see if anyone else objects on the talk page.--Ermenrich (talk) 20:02, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We're always going to get people whose patrotic ourage at the omission of their local variety causes them to complain. I suggest we put a comment at the head of the table saying that the selection is based on carefully considered consensus and no language should be added without discussion on the Talk page. That at least means we can rv without compunction.--Pfold (talk) 22:16, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I wouldn't be entirely opposed to removing Low German and Yiddish either. Low German almost always agrees with either Dutch or German (or both), and Yiddish is extremely close to German.
How many more words do we think the table can take? I was considering adding "earth" and possibly "word" (both because of the Norse developments mostly), but I have a feeling that if we're not careful the thing will get too long again.--Ermenrich (talk) 23:59, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Low German is actually already represented by Dutch (a Low German dialect raised to language status). Yiddish was elevated to language status so late that it can be removed, IMHO.--Berig (talk) 06:31, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Low Franconian ≠ Low Saxon, and the latter is a language degraded to dialect status with the demise of the Hanseatic League – that's how many see it. Anyway, less is more, so I don't feel strongly about keeping Low German and Yiddish. –Austronesier (talk) 09:39, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd keep Low German — even if the forms we've chosen are close to those of Dutch — as a historically important branch of WGmc. --Pfold (talk) 14:27, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I guess there's enough consensus to remove Yiddish then? I think "standard" Yiddish, which we are using, is sort of artificially kept close to German, unfortunately. It would be more interesting to see one of the variants that are actually in common use, where, e.g. "gut" is pronounced closer to "gīt" (at least to my ears, maybe its more like gɨt).
Low German also suffers from not having a standard - a lot of the dialects vary quite a bit more from standard German or Dutch than the forms Wiktionary lists as "Low German". I'm not always sure which one on Wiktionary to choose, honestly. If anyone knows a Low German dictionary online we could say that we use the forms listed there and dispense with the need to select forms via the rather problematic process of looking at Wiktionary. This would be useful for West Frisian as well.
FYI, some of the Gothic forms that were formerly on the list appear to have been made up (those for bread and formerly for apple, for instance), so it might be worth checking those against an outside source as well. I have Lehmann's Gothic Etymological Dictionary, which is one possibility.--Ermenrich (talk) 15:43, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Surprisingly standard Yiddish is based on the pronunciation of North-Eastern Yiddish ("Lithuanian Yiddish"), due to the prestige of the Yiddish in Vilnius. The kind of Yiddish you're thinking of is Polish Yiddish (I wrote a book for my children documenting their family history).--Berig (talk) 15:52, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What about Plautdietsch as representative of Low Saxon? It's based on East Low German (and indeed very similar to the Platt I've heard from old folks who still grew up speaking Low Prussian), and much less influenced by Standard German than Low German as spoken in present-day northern Germany. –Austronesier (talk) 16:21, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the LG forms to follow this dictionary. It has a few features I wouldn't have associated with Low German (use of ei where I would expect ee in "twei", for instance), but it does provide forms that are less like German or Dutch and generally more unique ("gaud" for good) than those found in Wiktionary, where I think the rule is sort of to just undo the second sound shift...--Ermenrich (talk) 16:24, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think Plautdietsch would be an intersting kind of Low German to include.--Berig (talk) 16:25, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, Wiktionary's Low German is pretty authentic Northern Low Saxon which has been less affected by vowel shifts than e.g. Westphalian, Reuter's Mecklenburgisch or Low Prussian (incl. Mennonite Plautdietsch), maybe that's why it looked somewhat boring in the table. –Austronesier (talk) 17:28, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers[edit]

Would it perhaps make sense to include numbers 1-10 (or twelve) and maybe some multiples of ten in a separate table?--Ermenrich (talk) 13:32, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I would like a table of the numbers in both the modern and the historic Germanic languages, but that would probably be too big.--Berig (talk) 13:48, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moving info from Germanic peoples?[edit]

@Alcaios, Austronesier, Pfold, and Berig: the section on language at Germanic peoples is currently much better sourced and written than this article, despite not yet even covering everything that probably should be covered there. That article is oversized however. I wonder if we could move that text here and then cut it down in size and scope there. However, given the different organization of the two articles, we need to figure out exactly how we want to do that first.--Ermenrich (talk) 18:03, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ermenrich: it would take a lot of time and effort to rewrite this article. I've started a draft; there's only an (incomplete) general bibliography for the moment. Alcaios (talk) 19:43, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this is a huge task. One thing we should probably separate from scratch is a strictly synchronic typological section, à la Harbert (2007). In the current version, synchronic and diachronic facts are all mixed together. And maybe a separate main article for the detailed phonological and morphological history would be helpful, so we can condense the presentation here to give room for expanding things like "Writing" (which is comparatively weak next to Germanic_peoples#Early_attestations). –Austronesier (talk) 20:51, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify my remarks- the Germanic peoples article doesn’t cover everything, I think the language section there is excellent. We can move it into the draft and use it as a basis for at least a partial rewrite here, don’t you think.—Ermenrich (talk) 20:58, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It could be a start but the section in the Germanic peoples article is (quite rightly) focused on Proto-Germanic and early medieval Germanic languages, whereas this article is about Germanic languages in general. Alcaios (talk) 21:10, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify – the history section of this article doesn't even mention the worlwide expansion of Germanic languages from the 19th century onward led by the British Empire, the US cultural influence and, to a lesser extent, the Dutch (e.g. Suriname and South Africa) and Danish (e.g. Greenland) colonial expansion. The recent developments are mixed up in a section called /modern status/. Alcaios (talk) 21:23, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vocabulary comparison[edit]

@UsagiDreams: there is a consensus on this page not to include every Germanic language. We only include one version of Frisian, one version of Low German, one High German language, and one version of Norwegian, although two are official in Norway. This has nothing to do with being a bigot, it has to do with showing our readers variety within the Germanic family. Scots and English are similar enough that they would often be exactly the same (the same reason we don't include Afrikaans).--Ermenrich (talk) 18:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I might add (though it doesn't seem you care to discuss the matter) that your edits have messed up the formatting of the table.--Ermenrich (talk) 19:09, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Atleast call "German" "Standardgerman"! (EDIT: even better: Neuhochdeutsche Schriftsprache)[edit]

In the Article is a Vocabulary comparison Table where it is assumed that the "Standargerman" spelling is called just German! That is much too imprecise.

Westfrisian and Lowgerman get their own table columns even though almost no one speaks this language any more. the bavarian language, on the other hand, is alive! 320luca (talk) 16:52, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only answering the last exclamation: linguistic vitality is not a major criterion here, otherwise we wouldn't have Gothic here, which is considerably deader than the rest. We just want a to give a broad yet concise sample of the major branches, and High German varieties are already represented by Standard German. –Austronesier (talk) 19:11, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Second what Austronesier said. Also: the normal name for "Standard German" is "German," just as the normal name for "Standard French" is "French," "Standard Italian" "Italian," etc. There is no need to specify "standard" in this context.--Ermenrich (talk) 20:45, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is a need to specify because the Name is not German but Standardgerman or Hochdeutsch. (not to be confused with uppergerman) 320luca (talk) 21:17, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is no standard on how to write word in bavarian, so german can not represent the Upper german language(s). 320luca (talk) 21:15, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In fact the name is "German" (or Deutsch if you prefer). Are you telling me that Duden is wrong [4]? "Standard German" would only be necessary if we were discussing German dialects, which we are not (Low German is generally considered a separate language by linguists, as is West Frisian, which is spoken in the Netherlands anyway). Furthermore, (standard) German is a standardized Upper/High German variant for the most part (with Middle German elements), so, yes, it is quite representative of Upper German. I notice you aren't insisting we add "standard" to any other languages on the table, all of which also have dialects.--Ermenrich (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Duden is neither wrong nor right, but it is but one Dictionary of Spelling among others.
If Low German is a seperate Language in which they dont write "Fliege" but "Fleeg", how can we then let German stand and not be more clear in the Table?
Readers are already assuming that the "Germans" (whoever they are...nobody seems to be sure on WP) all have one Standard on how to write "proper" German, when in fact these Words in the Table are only written this Way in Standardgerman.
Im a Native Speaker of Bavarian and Standardgerman is not representative of my Language.
That is not just i who is of that View but also Prof. Dr. Robert Hinderling im his Works.
(Im not interested in the other Languages.)
)
320luca (talk) 21:57, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Low German has been differentiated from High German by the use of low. We don't include Bavarian on this table for the reasons already explained to you. The point is to show a wide range of differences caused by sound changes, hitting all the major branches, not represent every dialect or sub-variant of Germanic. Adding "standard" to "German" would be as redundant as adding "standard" to Danish or Dutch here.--Ermenrich (talk) 22:11, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
People not invested in Linguistics will then assume the whole "Germanspeaking" Countries write the same ie. speak the same, which is not the case in Switzerland, Austria, Southtyrol, Bavaria, etc...
But i dont fault you or me for arguring over this pointless Topic, afterall we just didnt accept yet that the whole of Austria and Southtyrol is not german anymore.
It id just that the Law, Politics, Wikipedia are slow to catch up.
Today German is only spoken and written in Germany. (But im not German, so i wont dictate it to the Discriminated on how they shoulf feel up there.) 320luca (talk) 22:54, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There's no such thing as 'Standardgerman'!
Dyḗwsuh₃nus (talk) 10:26, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standarddeutsch 320luca (talk) 21:18, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't wish to discourage your contributing, but, to be blunt, there is simply no point in a non-specialist who is not familiar with the English-language literature of the subject trying to "correct" the local (in some cases highly qualified) experts who are familiar with that literature. --Pfold (talk) 22:54, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your Honesty. I wont correct anybody, they need to understand it themselves. 320luca (talk) 22:58, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]


EDIT: An even better Word would be "neuhochdeutsche Schriftsprache" in case of German. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 320luca (talk • contribs) 23:10, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No it wouldn't. You appear to be here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS - Wikipedia is not here to fight your battle against the German language in Austria and South Tyrol.--Ermenrich (talk) 16:12, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussions at the article Southtyroleans (created by the OP of this discussion) need the attention of the editors of this page.--Ermenrich (talk) 16:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox map[edit]

The infobox map European Germanic languages includes Irish, Welsh, Cornish, and Manx which are Celtic rather than Germanic languages. Perhaps understandably since they are not Germanic languages they are not mentioned anywhere in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.66.115.96 (talk) 08:24, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesn’t. Are you sure you’re linking to the right map?—Ermenrich (talk) 12:06, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Click to zoom in (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Germanic_languages_with_dialects.png) and you can see grey labels for "irish" in the centre of the Republic of Ireland, "welsh" in southeast Wales, and "cornish" in Cornwall.
The grey area in northwest Scotland is also somewhat misleading since for the most part people who report being able to speak Gaelic are <15% of the population. Only the Outer Hebrides have >50% Gaelic speakers. https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-government-gaelic-language-plan-2016-2021/pages/4/ 73.66.115.96 (talk) 23:40, 6 April 2023 (UTC)\[reply]
See Cornish dialect, Irish English, Welsh English, and Manx English.--Ermenrich (talk) 23:43, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Elfdalian on family tree[edit]

Elfdalian should be under Daleclarian dialects on the family tree Cinnamon338 (talk) 13:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Germanic_languages&oldid=1215845442"