You are currently viewing abstracts tagged with the keyword "Linguistics"

Scandinavian Viking-Age runic epigraphy is according to Sawyer (2000, 8) always rendered in Old Scandinavian. However, there remains a tiny residue of 11th–12th c. epigraphs, which are reminiscent of texts in a natural language, yet not amenable to a Scandinavian (or Latin) reading and hence usually considered to be magical, encrypted, or nonsensical. Eliasson (2007, […]

[ Continue reading ... ]

In Old Norwegian a phenomenon dubbed vowel harmony affects the realization of the unstressed phonemes /i/ and /u/. Researchers see this phenomenon as a progressive distant assimilation, where the closeness of a stressed vowel influences the closeness of the vowel in the following syllable. There has been debate concerning both the geographical distribution of this […]

[ Continue reading ... ]

Svaret på denna fråga har hittills varit ‘ja’. Det mest välkända exemplet på denna betydelse återfinns i den Första grammatiska avhandlingen (ca 1150), där författaren argumenterar för att anpassa och utöka det latinska alfabetet för att uppnå ett grafofonemiskt precist skriftsystem som lämpar sig för fornisländskan. Han säger då till sin tänkta motpart att eigi […]

[ Continue reading ... ]

Die meisten Editionen von Runeninschriften bieten neben einer Transliterierung der Inschrift (Umsetzung der Runen in eine Schrift mit lateinischen Zeichen und Hilfszeichen) auch eine Transkription in eine landessprachliche Sprache an. Dieses Verfahren ist auch von Handschrifteneditionen bekannt, wo man dann von Normalisierung spricht. Im Lauf der Forschungsgeschichte hat sich z. B. für das Altisländische des […]

[ Continue reading ... ]

One of the most important contributors to our understanding of older runic epigraphy, Elmer Antonsen was a controversial scholar. Best remembered for bringing an overtly structural and neo-Bloomfieldian approach to the study of the earliest inscriptions, he was also something of a contrarian, promoting readings and interpretations of older runic texts which did not find […]

[ Continue reading ... ]

Verbplasseringi i runespråket hev vore rekna som prinsipielt fri (t.d. Krause, Die Sprache der urnordischen Runeninschriften, 1971). Likevel viser det seg at det finitte verbet i flestalle runeinnskrifter er plassert på fyrste- eller andreplass i setningi (i samsvar med den sokalla V2-regelen som gjeld i norrønt mål), og at dei fåe innskriftene der verbet er […]

[ Continue reading ... ]

In the past there seemed to be quite an amount of consensus of how the older Runic inscriptions were to be read (cf. W. Krause, Die Runeninschriften im älteren Futhark. I. Text. II. Tafeln. Mit Beiträgen von Herbert Jankuhn. Göttingen, 1966). This consensus was also codified in a nearly coherent grammar of the early Runic […]

[ Continue reading ... ]

It is well known that the predecessor of Old Norse (ON) must have gone through a process of final devoicing at some point in time. As pointed out by O. Grønvik and H. Bjorvand, among other scholars, this follows quite clearly from internal reconstruction of Old Norse. Forms like 3. sg. pret. ON batt ‘bound’ […]

[ Continue reading ... ]

Although (North) Germanic languages are known to have been in close contact with Finnic and Sámi languages throughout their history, to my knowledge no systematic attempts have been made to identify possible Finno-Ugric elements in runic inscriptions. This may in part reflect assumptions about linguistic and cultural contacts that appear outdated in the light of […]

[ Continue reading ... ]