Talk:Furillen

Fir

It is incorrect to forthrightly state that the Swedish word "fur" means literally "pine" in English. The more correct translation of "fur" would be the English word "fir", a type of conifer that grows in Gotland, as do other evergreen species such as pine, spruce and yew. To state authoritatively that the translation of "fur" is exclusively "pine" is therefore incorrect, and there should at least be reference made to the fact that the Swedish "fur" and English "fir" are cognates.

Here is the entry for the word "fir" from the Online Etymology Dictionary:

fir (n.)

late 14c., from Old Norse fyri- "fir" or Old Danish fyr, both from Proto-Germanic *furkhon (source also of Old High German foraha, German Föhre "fir"), from PIE root *perkwu-, originally meaning "oak," also "oak forest," but never "wood" (source also of Sanskrit paraktah "the holy fig tree," Hindi pargai "the evergreen oak," Latin quercus "oak," Lombardic fereha "a kind of oak"). Old English had a cognate form in furhwudu "pine wood" (only in glosses, for Latin pinus), but the modern English word is more likely from Scandinavian and in Middle English fyrre glosses Latin abies "fir," which is of obscure origin.

According to Indo-Europeanists Gamkrelidze and Ivanov, "The semantics of the term clearly points to a connection between 'oak' and mountainous regions, which is the basis for the ancient European term applied to forested mountains" (such as Gothic fairgunni "mountainous region," Old English firgen "mountain forest," Middle High German Virgunt "mountain forest; Sudetes"). In the period 3300 B.C.E. to 400 B.C.E., conifers and birches gradually displaced oaks in northern European forests. "Hence it is no surprise that in the early history of the Germanic languages the ancient term for mountain oak and oak forest shifts to denote conifers and coniferous forests." [Thomas V. Gamkrelidze, Vjaceslav V. Ivanov, "Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans," Berlin, 1994][1]

As can be seen from this etymologic analysis, the word "fur" and "fir" are probably exact cognates in Old Norse, German, Old Danish, Proto-Germanic and Old English. The precise meaning of the word has varied over time, but it would be more correct to say that the Swedish word "fur" is more closely identical to the English word "fir" than it would be for "pine". The word "pine" comes from an entirely different source than does "fir". Indeed, the origin of "pine" is from Latin "pinus", while the origin of "fir/fur" is Germanic. Here to clarify and support this is the Online Etymology Dictionary for the word "pine":

pine (n.)

"coniferous tree," Old English pin (in compounds), from Old French pin and directly from Latin pinus "pine, pine-tree, fir-tree," which is perhaps from a PIE *pi-nu-, from root *peie- "to be fat, swell" (see fat (adj.)). If so, the tree's name would be a reference to its sap or pitch. Compare Sanskrit pituh "juice, sap, resin," pitudaruh "pine tree," Greek pitys "pine tree." Also see pitch (n.1). Pine-top "cheap illicit whiskey," first recorded 1858, Southern U.S. slang. Pine-needle (n.) attested from 1866.

Most of us have wished vaguely & vainly at times that they knew a fir from a pine. As the Scotch fir is not a fir strictly speaking, but a pine, & as we shall continue to ignore this fact, it is plain that the matter concerns the botanist more than the man in the street. [Fowler][2]

Therefore, to state that one of the possible origins of the name "Furillen" means "island of pines" is not correct. It should more accurately be translated to say "island of firs", due to the fact that the Swedish word "fur" and the English word "fir" are exact cognates. I suggest the article should be changed to accommodate this, otherwise it is misleading. --Saukkomies ^talk 18:45, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Do as you please. --cart-Talk 11:28, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

To note: I have read the Gotland County Administration Board's inventory of the Furillen nature reserve and this. It speaks frequently about the significant old pine (sv: tall) forest on the island. There is however no mention of any firs (sv: ädelgran). If this was to be called the "island with the fir forest", you'd think that at least some firs would show up in an inventory of the flora. --cart-Talk 18:33, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

It is likely that the word (sv: tall) was and still is inclusive of more than one single species of tree, just as is the case with the English word pine, which can be used to describe (albeit inaccurately) any coniferous tree. If I could, I would walk through the forest on Furillen and see for myself what sort of tree is prevalent in its forest, whether it be specifically pine or fir or whatever. Perhaps the next time you visit Gotland, you might ascertain this? There are some simple methods to determine the species of a conifer: if it has more than one needle per cluster, it is a pine. If there is only one needle per cluster, then you prick the needles with your finger; if the needle is sharp and causes pain, it is a spruce. If the needle is soft like the fur of an animal, than it is a fir. --Saukkomies ^talk 12:09, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Per suggestion above, an investigation during a walk through Furillen has been done: needles in clusters were in pairs on the predominant part of the trees with needles. There were also some spruces and juniper, both had sharp needles. No soft single-needles were found outside gardens where some specimens were planted. Per Swedish Museum of Natural History only "gran (Picea abies) and tall (Pinus sylvestris)" of the Pinaceae are indigenous to the region, all the other are planted and do not cover larger areas. Also added the best refs you can find for the tall/fur. I'm removing the tags. --cart-Talk 16:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)