Talk:East Germanic languages
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- The author should review the latest article "Ostgermanisch" in the Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde on this subject. This article summarises the latest research on this issue and argues:
It claimed in the article that Crimean Gothic survived until 18th century(no citations by the way). Where did survived, interesting. The Crimea was Turkic region at least from the conquest by the Golden Horde in 13th century.220.127.116.11 (talk) 15:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
East Germanic closer to North Germanic or to West Germanic
Why not look up Kortland's interesting article? http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art198e.pdf
1. East Germanic is not closer to North Germanic than either is to West Germanic. 2. East Germanic separated out of the Germanic language group much earlier than North and West Germanic split, which is why linguists now refer to "North-West Germanic". 3. Archaeological evidence shows that the Goths, i.e. the carriers of the Wielbark culture did not come from Scandinavia, but developed authochtonously from the Okcywie culture. 4. The name "Burgundarholmr" is a learned reconstruction. The name of the island Bornholm simply means the "high island". This meaning was lost in the middle ages and scholars thought to link the name with the Burgundians and created the name "Burgundarholmr". Archaeology cannot link the Burgundians (i.e. Lebus-Lausitz culture) with Bornholm. See. R. Kaiser "Die Burgunder" 2004.
In conclusion: About everything in this article is wrong or outdated. The article should be revised.
- Your objections are interesting. In 1 and 2, you talk of one way of classifying Germanic languages based on the fact that N and W Germanic had a great deal of areal influence while Gothic was relatively isolated from N and W Germanic. In 3 you contradict even Kokowski (who is the main supporter of a development from the Oksywie culture to the Wielbark culture but state that it happened during a Scandinavian immigration). In 4 you contradict medieval Scandinavian sources, which are quoted in the article. I am afraid that I will have to follow your contributions.--Berig 11:38, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I removed Lombardic as east germanic language and added it to West Germanic languages. Lombardic underwent the second germanic sound shifting and hence is a upper german dialect. This wrong classification is ubiquitious throughout wikipedia. So, please, watch out for it. THX. --Zinnmann 13:48, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- What do you mean? When this sound shift took place the Lombards lived in Northern Italy and in contiguity with upper German dialects in the north. IMHO, it shows phonological influence (like that of German on Danish), not their origins. I'll reinsert them.--Wiglaf 08:55, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Mr. Zinnmann was correct to remove Lombardic from the Eas Germanic entry. Lombardic was most closely related to Bavarian. See for example the B-P rotation. The special volume on "Trümmersprachen ..." of the Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde is the definitive source and it shows without doubt that Lombardic was West Germanic, which shouldn't surprise either since the Langobards were an Elbe Germanic tribe classified by Tacitus as belonging to the Suevi.
There are five sources in the reference section for one paragraph of text. Have all of them actually been used? Are all five actually needed? Is it just a list of recommended reading?
Since the term Period III is used in this article but no link is provided, I'm going to admit my ignorance and ask what it means. Will one of the editors please tell me? Thanks.
- It must be period III of the Nordic Bronze Age, i.e. c. 1200BC.--Berig (talk) 21:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Alternate name: "llevionic"
2. Oder-Vistula Germanic or East-Germanic or "Illevionic" (Gothic, Vandalic, Burgundian)
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/gothic-l/conversations/messages/4791 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:21, 6 January 2015 (UTC)