Talk:Fjord

Definition needs expansion?

I was puzzled by this article explicitly calling water in a quite flat area a "fjord": Mariager Fjord. Fjord must mean something else besides the explanation in this article " a long, narrow inlet with steep sides or cliffs". 98.210.208.107 (talk) 12:02, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Please read further into the article and you'll find a section on Scandinavian usage; this example is of Danish/Scandinavian usage. That said, you are correct. This article accretes inconsistent additions almost as frequently as any article. This is because it is so popular - everyone adds - few read it to weed it down for encyclopedic content. We need a major rewrite as part of an attempt to bring it up to at least A-level article status.

Skål - Williamborg (Bill) 04:31, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Fiord spelling

In English "...the word was for a long time normally rendered fiord..." - a spelling preserved in many place names. The fact that this spelling is now generally only current in New Zealand English is a minor, tho interesting, point that doesn't need to be in the first sentence of the article - but is covered fully later. Snori (talk) 17:49, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I tend to agree. We don't detail which branches of English use the other spelling right in the lead. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Saguenay fjord

I see another IP has removed it again a couple of times. It has been discussed before in the archive,Talk:Fjord/Archive_1#Is_the_Saguenay_inlet_a_fjord.3F, and though some of the links are outdated, there is no question that the Saguenay fjord (which is only part of the Saguenay River, from Saint-Fulgence to the Saint-Lawrence estuary) is a fjord, with sea water, tides, arctic marine life that is not otherwise found at that latitude or that deep into the continent (beluga whales and Greenland sharks), and was created by receding glaciers. I put a cite to The Canadian Encyclopedia's article. It's not hard to find more sources.--74.58.194.221 (talk) 13:11, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Origin of the word, "false fjords" ?

The word "fjord" origins from the Scandinavian languages and Old Norse. The article only deals with Norwegian fjords however. There are many fjords also in Denmark and Sweden (at the eastern coast somtimes refered to as "fjärd" instead. But all it really means is a narrow part of the sea. For instance Limfjorden is actually a straight that connects the North Sea with Cattegat without being deep. There are no demands that at fjord needs to be deep, or surrounded by mountains. So "Vikinger" = "People from the fjords" gets very disturbing with the current describtion. The heartland of the Vikinger before their expansion, (around the 7th century) was the area which includes Jutland, the Danish islands and and southern third of the Scandinavian peninsula. The geologigal term should therefore be separated from the true meaning of the word, I think 1. fjord (historical vikinger term) 2. fjord (modern geological term)Boeing720 (talk) 00:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

No, the article is primarily about the inlets typically described as fjords in English. It is not about what Scandinavians call fjords/fjards, except in some minor respects, e.g. where it's relevant to the etymology of the English word, or to people interested in the geography of those countries. I've reverted the lengthy off-topic opinion added in front of the lead section, and the changes to the "false fjords" section. Not that I'm a fan of that phrase - I'd agree that it's needlessly confrontational. --Avenue (talk) 07:42, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

OK. But the word "fjord" has been in use within English language long time before any theories about their formation was thought of, and has included f.i. Limfjord in Denmark (in Danish it's "Limfjorden"). You also avoid the main issue. In English language the word "Vikings" (or "Vikingr) still means "Men (or people) from the fjords". And has done so long time before anyone distinguished Norwegian fjords from other ones. But at the time for their expansion they mainly lived around "false fjords". Almost none Viking-ship has been recovered in Norway, while plenty has been found in Denmark and Sweden up to approx latitude 59-60 North. And within the English language "fjord" atleast has ment all fjords. Hence I suggest a new article for the description of all fjords due to this fact. It will cover all Scandinavian fjords but not mention their creation, only their history.

Elsewise I have removed lots of wrongful words from the lists of "English words with Swedish/Norwegian origin" (2 lists), they were maily dishes, well described in articles. But a Wikipedia article doesn't make a word as "Surströmming" a part of the English language ! But this is different. Boeing720 (talk) 23:26, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Oxford Dictionaries dates the use of "fjord" in English back to the late 17th century,[1] so I'd agree that it has been used in English without any idea of their glacial origin. But I'm pretty sure that its English meaning doesn't usually encompass inlets or narrows between lands of low relief. Dictionary definitions seem almost unanimous about the inlets being between cliffs or at least steep slopes.[2][3][4] I've found one dictionary that gives a second meaning as "(in Scandinavia) a bay",[5] which I think this article's section on Fjord#Scandinavian usage already covers in enough depth.

Overall I think this article should continue to focus on the (English) geographical meaning of the word. Of course you are welcome to start another article covering Scandinavian fjords and their history. --Avenue (talk) 13:11, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

It's not a question of English or non-English, it is a question of scientific or non-scintific.--Ulamm (talk) 00:48, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

It seems like it would be smart to start the article by pointing out the origin of the term, and the fact that it differs from the same word in the originating languages. English speakers can govern their own language, but not pointing out that an english term lifted directly from another language has a different meaning seems more like obfuscating the truth than anything. There's nothing saying english use has to encompass the original meaning, but not acknowledging that this is a scientific term derived from a term with a wider meaning is more like putting blinders on than sticking to the facts. There are several norwegian fjords(listed as such on Wikipedia) that would be "fjards" by this terminology. I know there is a section detailing the difference in scandinavian use, but I think the onus is on the english version of the term to define itself, and not to treat it like it is the original meaning of the word. I'm used to the first paragraph of a Wikipedia article defining semantics like this, and not a short paragraph near the end. I think the world is more connected now than centuries ago when english people traveled the world thinking of every remote locale as theirs to define. I think current english speakers would appreciate being better informed as well. Markopeter (talk) 12:39, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

English WP should focus on the English use of the word with a global perspective, not the English speaking world, that is, fjords as understood in the English language, not fjords in USA, UK and New Zealand. Issues raised above are however complicated because the label fjord is used for bodies of water that are not fjords in a geological sense (that is, glacial valleys filled with water). Some fjords, such as Milford Sound, are not called fjords. In addition, in Norway (and Sweden) "fjord" is also used for lakes (not perceived as fjords in English), but are still fjords in a glacial valleys filled with water (some were in fact filled with sea water until the rebound lifted the threshold above sea level). See tentative table below.

	Called "fjord" in English	Not "fjord" in English
True, saltwater fjord	Sognefjord	Milford Sound
"False" fjord	Limfjord	Lim canal
Freshwater fjord ("real" fjord, geological perspective)		Mjøsa

--— Erik Jr. 17:00, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

If the article should only cover "fjord" as it is used in English without regard to their glacial origin (as Avenue suggests above), then it does not make sense to discuss geology as for instance Limfjord, Oslofjord and Sognefjord dont have much in common geologically. — Erik Jr. 17:24, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Sources for etymologies

What are your sources for the etymologies given? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:330B:6C00:2D35:FB88:481F:C944 (talk) 16:57, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Removed this: "This word has partially lost that meaning. The one geographic object is a waterbody that allows the traveller to enter the land by boat, the other one is the shallow site in a waterbody that allows the traveller to cross the water on foot, horse or wheels."

--— Erik Jr. 17:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Question about Skelton Inlet as Deepest Fjord in the World

Skelton Inlet is cited here and many other places as the deepest fjord in the World. Yes, the bedrock valley is deep, about 1900 m at its deepest, but it is filled with ice. A fjord is defined as a narrow, steep sided inlet, cut by ice but presently filled by sea water. It would seem that Skelton Inlet is not a fjord and should be removed from the listing in the page. Would the sub-glacial Lake Vostok be called a fjord?--MuTau — Preceding undated comment added 00:58, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Sill or shoal

The sill or shoal at the mouth of glacial fjords are referred to as "terskel" (threshold) in Norwegian. Is there no fixed term for this in English? This threshold (as far as I understand) can be bedrock or moraine. --— Erik Jr. 13:17, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

A Norwegian fjord near Kristiansund covered in sea ice

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Bolgav%C3%A5gen_i_vinter.JPG/220px-Bolgav%C3%A5gen_i_vinter.JPG

I wonder about the correctness of using this image in an article about Fjords, when the image used is infact not a Fjord, but rather an Inlet or a Sound (Våg, Bukt in Norwegian). The spesific Inlet in question is not, and never will be, in the right sense of the term, a Fjord.

The Bay also consist mostly of Freshwater, not seawater, which is the reason it freezes over in the winter, as seen in that image.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ingemazen (talk • contribs) 13:10, 17 October 2016 (UTC) 

The small bay is part of bremsnesfjorden, so technically fjord, many Norwegian fjords are brackish. But i agree it is not a good example. Perhaps replace with another image of a frozen fjord. — Erik Jr. 22:23, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

A fjord is not a type of bay

"The German use of the word Förde for long narrow *bays* on their Baltic Sea coastline, indicates..." "Whereas fjord names mostly describe *bays* (though not always geological fjords), straits in the same regions typically are named..."

A fjord is NOT a type of bay. This is an incorrect use of the word bay. (The main article on Bays also makes this error so please do not use this as a reference or support! I wonder if the same person editing this may have added fjords as an example of a type of Bay...?).

It is NOT case that a bay is any area largely surrounded by land (and with a fjord as a sub-type of bay). A bay specifically has the sense of an open or rounded (usually both) area of water, largely surrounded by land. A bay is not a narrow inlet. There is no one English word that covers both senses. Rather we have two words covering different geographic features. Please see dictionary definitions of ford which describe a narrow inlet (and not refer to bay).

I simply would replace 'bays' in both the quoted sentences with 'narrow inlets'.

I would guess that a non-English speaker has (understandably) used bay since they were looking for a more native English word for fjord. However there basically isn't one (probably because England does not really have any fjords so had no need for the word!). Hence why English adopted and uses Fjord.

Note however, as the article correctly states, that Scots/Scottish English does have a word - Firth - which is derived from Scandinavian fjord. (To complicate matters, Firth is however used slightly differently again from both the standard English narrow geological definition of Firth AND the wider Scandinavian usage of Fjord!) Iainmacg (talk) 16:37, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Vestfjorden - a "fjord" or a "bay" or a "strait?

Boknafjorden

There is apparently no consistent use of the term "fjord", please see my tentative summary table above. One reason is that the word occurred before any scientific understanding of how landforms are created, specifically the type of glacial valley that is most associated with "fjord". Even in Norway, where the word originates, "fjord" is used for many kinds of bodies of water, including bays. For instance Vestfjorden is a kind of bay or a strait between the mainland and Lofoten. Boknafjorden is called a fjord or is perhaps a bay? The large lakes of East Norway are "fjords" in the local terminology, and in fact in a strict geological sense. Whereas the Oslofjorden is not a glacial valley but a graben or depression. I think we have to accept these ambiguities, and describe the variations as precisely as possible. --— Erik Jr. 19:31, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Erik for your response and your nice use of the maps to demonstrate types of fjord (in broader native Scandinavian usage). However, you misunderstand me! I largely agree with everything you said (except your use of 'bay') but you are largely debating the point about there being two usages of fjord: firstly a native broader Scandinavian usage and secondly a narrower geological sense (which I understand).

However firstly let's get the above point about there being two usages of fjord so we can agree that we both understand each other and agree! I also hope that that I can demonstrate that I understand the wider point about Scandinavian usage better than most English speakers since I am in the relatively rare position of being Scottish and as noted, we have 'firths' which is a cognate of 'fjord' from our shared Scandinavian/Norse heritage and it basically has a similar usage as the native Scandinavian usage (or at least it covers the broader meanings of fjord). I will explain that more with some examples as you did (partially because it's just interesting!). So usages of 'fjord':

1/ original native broader Scandinavian usage This meaning is broader in the sense that it describes more geographical features than the narrow English/geological meaning of the word. As you have described, and I agree with, this use of fjord describes:

a/ geological fjords

b/ sea-water (non-geological) fjords - long narrow inlets. Fjord shaped in two dimensions but without steep sides. Example - the Schlei in Schleswig-Holstein is a good one since it very much does NOT look like most English speaking people's idea of a fjord (PS. I have sailed on it so it's familiar!) In Scotland, cognate 'firth', see Firth of Clyde (especially *upper* firth - lower firth is more like my category e/). Also Cromarty Firth. All easily searchable I hope. Will link if I have time! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firth_of_Clyde#/media/File:Firthofclydemap.png

c/ fresh-water fjords (which as you say may or may not have been sea water earlier before land rise). Again fjord shaped and steep sided; geologically same as a/. (Again we have similar in Scotland but, confusingly, we would never call these 'firths' for some reason - we use the word 'loch' (lake) for these and have reserved the word 'firth' for the wider meanings your have demonstrated above. Note that there can be sea lochs, e.g. Loch Etive, and fresh-water lochs, e.g Loch Awe, just like your fjords.). My *guess* would be that we took the sea-faring Norse word for the more peripheral feature and used the Gaelic 'loch' for the more central geological fjords...!

d/ straits Example - as per your example, the Vestfjorden. A Scottish example that is very similar would be the 'Pentland Firth' - a classic strait.

e/ fjord or estuary mouths (difficult to describe in English - they may well often just be called 'Estuary') Example - as per your example, Boknafjorden. In Scotland, Firth of Forth and Firth of Lorn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firth_of_Lorn#/media/File:FirthofLornmap.png

2/ geological/English fjords This meaning is, as the main subject of the Wiki article, narrower and refers only to meaning a/ above, i.e. steep sided geologically formed long narrow inlets.

OK, so now we hopefully have that part out of the way? There is much nuance and I am sure there are different ways of categorising in meaning 1/.... (For instance, some fjords that look like 1b/ are actually geologically formed but without steep high sides due to glacial ice pack and subsequent erosion.)

Now, on to my point: use of 'bay'. I would not in English, describe any of the meanings using the word 'bay'. There are possibly some exceptions, where because they just don't have the right words, one might use bay to describe some of the features in my category e/ but I don't think so and it still means that 'bay' is not a useful synonym. It is a misleading synonym. I would however DEFINITELY not use 'bay' to describe the meanings 2/, i.e. a geological fjord OR meaning 1b/ a low but narrow long inlet such as many of your 'fjord', German 'Förde' (such as the Schlei) or most Scottish 'firths' They are just not 'bays'! Go back and look at the quotes I objected to above. Are you with me now?