<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"> </span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">L O W L A N D S - L - 04 May 2007 - Volume 01</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">=========================================================================</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">From: </span><span id="_user_didimasure@hotmail.com" style="color: rgb(121, 6, 25); font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Diederik Masure <<a href="mailto:didimasure@hotmail.com">
didimasure@hotmail.com</a>></span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2007.05.03 (06) [E]</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><font style="font-size: 11px; font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><font size="2">"Danish," yes, but <span style="font-style: italic;">Norwegian </span>Danish, not <span style="font-style: italic;">
Danish </span>Danish.
You need to do some reading about the early history of Bokmål. The
spelling was more or less Danish, but the pronunciation was not in most
cases. Ibsen's works are generally considered Norwegian, not Danish.
In Ibsen's time you wrote for instance <span style="font-style: italic;">tid </span>and <span style="font-style: italic;">pige </span>but pronounced them as though written <span style="font-size: 10pt;">titt
and pike ('time' and 'girl') respectively, and, especially in the
"lower" classes, you used typically Norwegian words, such as jente
'girl' and gutt (vs Danish dreng) 'boy'. In one of the examples I
gave you it says, " om vinterkvelden," which in Danish would be "om
vinteraftenen" (lit. "in the winter evening"). Furthermore, that
language was usually pronounced with Norwegian tones, while Danish has
no tones. Integration of such Norwegianisms and development of a less
Danish spelling came in the 20th century, thus leading to an
increasingly Norwegian character. This is the evolution of Bokmål, a
Norwegian language; this Danish-looking writing being a part of its
development. This is why we call it "Dano-Norwegian" in English.
Before 1929 it was called Riksmål (national language). Ibsen's lingo
may well be called "Norwegian Danish," but the fact is that today's
majority Norwegian language developed from it.<br>>>> <br><br>I
am well read about the history of Norwegian, although my view may to an
extent be biased (I know...) by the fact that I generally write
Nynorsk. But yet I think I have enough background to have my opinion
about the matter. <br><br>At
first, pronunciation is out of the question here, since a Danish actor
would have pronounced it with stød instead of tones, and a Norwegian
would have said pike and used tones. It's thus the actor that decides
this, not the writer/the written source (Ibsen in this case). Only the
spelling/wordchoise matters in this discussion. <br><br>Secondly,
apart from "kveld" there is nothing that is rather Norw. than Danish.
If I write Standard Dutch it remains Standard Dutch even if I seldomly
use (conscious or not) a more southern coloured expression or word.
That does not suddenly make it Antwerpian. At most Standard Dutch with
a little Flemish touch. Thence Ibsen writes nearly pure Danish with a
small Norwegian twist. And although unusual, standard Danish <em>allows </em>the usage of the word kveld.
<br>I do not deny that modern Bokmål is a Norwegian language. But the Rigsmål in Ibsen's time was still Danish. Punktum. <br><br>And
a little PS, 'tid' (time) is generally pronounced "ti" (without d) in
Norway, not titt (titt is another word). Dialects in western Møre og
Romsdal still have the -d preserved, and at the utmost tip in the west
of that province they even still have the Old Norse ð.<br><br>----------<br><br></span></font></font><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">From: </span><span id="_user_didimasure@hotmail.com" style="color: rgb(121, 6, 25); font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
Diederik Masure <<a href="mailto:didimasure@hotmail.com">didimasure@hotmail.com</a>></span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Subject: Grammar2</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">My Taalkunde teacher provided me with material about the huset sitt/sitt hus question. </span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">The original Scandinavian form (Danish, Swedish and Norwegian) was Noun - Pronoun (huset sitt). </span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
The
change to huset sitt began apparently in Jutland, rune inscriptions
from the 9th century already show a mix of both forms. From there it
spread first to Sjælland and afterwards to south Sweden (rune inscr.
from 11th century?). </span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">In the 13th century the change seems to have
been completed in Denmark. Whether it was Low Saxon influence he could
not confirm nor deny. </span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">At this point (= the traditional dialects until some generations ago) it was a south/west difference. </span>
<br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">I got given a book which also is integrally available on the net, </span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><a style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;" href="http://www.hum.uit.no/a/vangsnes/Dialektboka.pdf" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://www.hum.uit.no/a/vangsnes/Dialektboka.pdf</a><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">scroll to page 32 of the book, i.e. page 38 of the pdf (?). </span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Nowadays
probably the huset mitt-part is a lot in Sweden, and has become a
east/west difference as originally stated by Ron. The "far min" area
which encomprises Stockholm and the Mälaren region could be an
explanation for the occasional (seldom) appearance of forms like "bror
min" even in the standard written language.</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">