Relationship between Danish and Dutch

Arthur   Thu Jun 29, 2006 10:07 pm GMT
I am fluent in Swedish, German and English. I am able to read Norwegian too, without much problem. There are two Germanic languages which for me are not so easy to "encode" phonetically speaking, which are Danish and Dutch. They seem to have a very particular sounds repertoire to me, and is remarkable how difficult I find them, even if I am perfectly able to read the other Scandinavian languages and German.

Is there somebody who can explain if there is a phonetic relationship between this two languages? I think they present a strong degree of assimilation, like French among the Romance languages. I think once I manage to understand these sounds systems, I will be able to learn much faster than I have being doing till now.

Besides, do they present special similarities between each other which do not exist in other Germanic languages?

Finally, even if this is not directly a languages related question, are there special similarities, historical parallelisms or by the contrary special antagonisms between both cultures which do not appear among the other Germanic peoples?

So Brennus, Travis, Sander, Frederik, Danes and Dutchmen, I am all ears.
Guest   Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:05 am GMT
Both are Germanics. It's that easy
Brennus   Fri Jun 30, 2006 5:26 am GMT
Arthur,

Re: "Relationship between Danish and Dutch" and "They seem to have a very particular sounds repertoire to me..." - I've heard other people conversant in English and German say the same things about Dutch and Danish ... that they are peculiar or weird.

Dutch is certainly spoken on former Celtic speaking territory and probably has some kind of a Celtic substratum. Had there been no Germanic invasions of the Netherlands in the 5th century A.D., I think that the Dutch today would probably be speaking something more like Manx or Breton. There was a German linguist (I don't recall his name)who first proposed the Celtic substratum theory for Dutch about 150 years ago.

In Viking times, according to the historical linguists of the Scandinavian languages that I've read, the Danish dialect of Old Norse was the most divergent while the Swedish and Norwegian dialects of the language were closer to each other. I remember asking a Danish immigrant I knew in Seattle once about differences among the three languages and he told me that Norwegian and Swedish had a "musical sound" to them while Danish was "more gutteral."
Presley.   Fri Jun 30, 2006 6:08 am GMT
Dansk and Norsk/Svensk, when written, are VERY similar, though. I was looking at snack a Swedish snack label, and it had Danish, Swedish and Norwegian. Most of the text was very similar.

We had a Swedish and Dutch exchange students. They couldn't understand each other very well. Swedish sounded sweeter and less-German than Danish.
Sander   Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:58 pm GMT
Brennus,

>>Dutch is certainly spoken on former Celtic speaking territory and probably has some kind of a Celtic substratum. Had there been no Germanic invasions of the Netherlands in the 5th century A.D., I think that the Dutch today would probably be speaking something more like Manx or Breton. There was a German linguist (I don't recall his name)who first proposed the Celtic substratum theory for Dutch about 150 years ago.<<

I have never heard about such a theory, but apart from that the Netherlands weren't invaded by Germanic tribes in the 5th century.That's plain rubbish.The Netherlands were a Germanic area ever since 500 BC, and the Franks arrived around 150 - 200 AD.

The Franks originated from Northern Poland, which has never known a Celtic inhabitance, and since the Dutch language is almost completely based on Frankish, I find the idea of a Celtic substrate somewhat unlikely.

Arthur,

I'm surprised you can't read at least a small bit of Dutch. If you're fluent in German and English, I would expect you to be able to at least understand a little bit.

Phonetically, it much much harder. Dutch and Danish are certainly the hardest Germanic languages to understand.

I'm pretty sure there isn't a (direct) link between the way they sound. Danish being North and Dutch being West Germanic.

Dutch has experienced very few sound changes since Proto West Germanic, this could be one of the reasons it sounds different.I do not know enough about Danish phonology to make asumptions on that.
lylyo   Fri Jun 30, 2006 7:59 pm GMT
>>Dutch has experienced very few sound changes since Proto West Germanic, this could be one of the reasons it sounds different<<

Veto! Concerning vowels English and Dutch had changed the most. Just look at proto-germanic or gothic words and you will see that you are totally wrong!
Fredrik from Norway   Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:22 pm GMT
Arthur wrote:
"I think they present a strong degree of assimilation, like French among the Romance languages"
Sounds true. I would add a high level of clitics too, at least for Danish.

I think there are several sound changes shared by the North Sea Germanic languages Danish, Frisian, Dutch and English, aren't there?
Jav   Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:06 pm GMT
Dutch is not a North Sea Germanic languages Fredrik ;-)
Jav   Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:08 pm GMT
>>Veto!<<

Ridiculous, Childish.

>> Concerning vowels English and Dutch had changed the most. Just look at proto-germanic or gothic words and you will see that you are totally wrong! <<

No Sander is right. Dutch is very close to Common West Germanic.

btw

I'd love to take a look at proto germanic, DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY WRITTEN SOURCES?! Hahahahaha, I wonder wo is totally wrong here ...
Brennus   Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:14 pm GMT
Sander,

Re: "I have never heard about such a theory, but apart from that the Netherlands weren't invaded by Germanic tribes in the 5th century.That's plain rubbish."

I don't know why you keep fighting me on this. And yes, you have heard the theory before because we have discussed it before. I pointed out that Holland was inhabited in ancient times by two Belgian Gallic tribes the Morini (whose name means "Seafarers" and the "Batavii" (whose name probably meant "Fighters" or "Combattants" - Comabttant even contains the Celtic root *bat(t)a in it). I also ponted out that there are place names in Holland that are of Celtic or at least partly Celtic origin including Lynden (Lindobrogen "Land of Lakes") , Niemagen (Noviomagus "New Market") and Amestelodamnum (Amsterdam) just to name a few.

The Franks did come out of part of what is now Poland, but the Gauls also extended into Southern Poland and there are still place names there today which are of Celtic origin. The fact is, before the Romans and the Germanic tribes (Germani) began migrating, the Celts had most of Europe to themselves. Even earlier than the Celts were the Beaker Folk (see Iberians, Basques and Etruscans) who seem to have extended as far north as the British Isles, Holland and Western Germany.

Please see web link below to on Celts.

http://mikesturm.nsi24.miniserver.de/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=7.
Arthur   Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:29 pm GMT
Guest,

Oh, thank you for the high level of your answer!!! I just don't know what would have been of me if you wouldn't have explained to me that both languages are Germanic........

Now as for more serious answers that I have received:
Brennus, I think I agree with Sander about the Celtic substratum, Dutch looks quite Germanic to me, especially once you speak some other Germanic languages (Scandinavian languages included).

Sander, I think I didn't make myself quite clear, sorry. I can read and understand quite a lot in Dutch and Danish (taking into account that I practically do not speak either of these languages), thanks to my knowledge of German and Swedish, you know this phenomenon, the more you read, the more you start to infere more unknown words.

What I meant is, when I learned German and Swedish, there were some similarities in the phonetics, which made it relatively easy for me to manage the pronountiation and oral comprehension when I listened these languages. The same happened to me when, still living in Sweden, I started to listen some dialogues in Norwegian.. It sounded familiar to my ears.

But then, I tried to do the same in Danish, and it was like a completely new world: a number of new vowels, this glottal stop, initial "r", final "iv"s, and the impression that I was hearing a language just phonetically tunned at a finer level than Sw, No, Ge, and En; the same occured when I was living in Germany and spoke German quite well, I tried to hear and understand some Dutch programs, taking for granted that the relationship between German and Dutch was big enough to make me able to understand easily..... and there I was, missing almost everything that was being said, with the same feeling of heavily assimilated sounds, gutteral consonants, back vowels, schwas, a very confusing "r", sometimes like the German "r", sometimes a little bit like the Spanish "r" etc., and again, the feeling of this language being tunned in a finer way, phonetically speaking... I am just talking about phonetics here.

But at the end of the day, both languages share the same sort of particular sound, regardless of one being North Germanic and the other West Germanic, no question about that.

Well, my impression of these languages is that those characteristics make them rather interesting, hum, mysterious could be the word.

So, I hope I have transmitted the idea and I hope I can read some interesting answers out there.
Guest   Sat Jul 01, 2006 7:54 am GMT
Jav,

>Ridiculous, Childish.<
Says who... "Hey I'm Jav and my language is the most germanic"
This reminds me of those belonging to the "latin section" LOL

>Dutch has experienced very few sound changes since Proto West Germanic,...<
>I'd love to take a look at proto germanic, DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY WRITTEN SOURCES?! Hahahahaha, I wonder wo is totally wrong here ...>

You are contradicting yourself!!! You must be plain stupid or just mentally retarded... :-( Sorry...
I was talking about WEST GERMANIC, not proto germanic - of course there aren't written sources of Proto Germanic but there are many linguists who are able to conclude from the history of all the germanic languages to Proto-Germanic, the "HYPOTHETICAL" prehistoric ancestor of all Germanic languages!
The vowel difference in Dutch is recognizable in WEST GERMANIC, thus it changed a bit -in comparison to the others!!!
Just take your time and have a look at these websites... I assure you, there are actually plenty more:
www.gotisch.de
http://www.koeblergerhard.de/germwbhinw.html
http://www.etymonline.com/
Sander   Sat Jul 01, 2006 8:38 am GMT
Brennus,

Even then your theory is incorrect,

The Netherlands (or Holland as you incorrectly prefer to call them), we inhabited by Germanic tribes (above the Rhine) since 500 BC - 50. The Batavians were a Germanic tribe, they were once even a part of the Chatti.Not Celts.

Then theres the naming of certain citties, which made me laugh a bit because they really illustrate the flaws in your theory:

>>Lynden (Lindobrogen "Land of Lakes") <<

Lynden in a small settlement in Candada.Now, the Dutch didn't go there for a long long while. I doubt there was a native celtin presence in Canada, although I think that if it was you could find it.

On first thought I would give the following other etymology:

Lynden is named after "Lindeboom/Linden", the Dutch name for the genus Tilia, and here probably refered to an abundance of Basswood or American Linden.

>>Niemagen (Noviomagus "New Market") <<

You forget that Nijmegen was first called Batavodorum, city/settlement of the Batavians.After the Batavian revolution, this city was destroyed and renamed by Trajanus: Ulpia Noviomagus Batavorum.

>> Amestelodamnum (Amsterdam) <<
This one was the real screamer , as Amsterdam was founded during the early 13th century.
Amstel = river
Dam = dam



Guest,

(And thanks to Jav for defending my point)

>>You are contradicting yourself!!! You must be plain stupid or just mentally retarded... :-( Sorry... <<

I think your style of writing says it all.

>>I was talking about WEST GERMANIC, not proto germanic - of course there aren't written sources of Proto Germanic but there are many linguists who are able to conclude from the history of all the germanic languages to Proto-Germanic, the "HYPOTHETICAL" prehistoric ancestor of all Germanic languages! <<

Oh please, let me quote your first post:

>>Concerning vowels English and Dutch had changed the most. Just look at proto-germanic or gothic words and you will see that you are totally wrong!<<

Are you still willing to claim you werent talking about proto Germanic?Please, you're making a totall fool out of yourself.

>>The vowel difference in Dutch is recognizable in WEST GERMANIC, thus it changed a bit -in comparison to the others!!! <<

That's why I said it was the closest modern language to common West Germanic, not proto Germanic. Learn to read.
Brennus   Sat Jul 01, 2006 9:52 am GMT
Sander,


Dutch Rijn; Rhyn (Rhine River) Name derives from Old Celti *Renos ("That Which Flows") and related to Old Irish rían "course, sea, ocean."

Leiden (Leyden) derives its name from Ludgunum Batavorum. Lugdunum ("Lug's Fortress") is also the source of London in England and Lyon in France. Maybe Lugo and Londoño in Spain.

The Morini (of Holland) worshiped a goddess called Nehanlennia who was the goddesss of seafarers. She was a Gallic (Celtic deity).

http://www.timelessmyths.com/celtic/gallic.html

Re: "Please, you're making a totally fool out of yourself. . ."

I'm presenting you with fact after fact. The fool is one who tries to argue without facts.
lucien   Sat Jul 01, 2006 10:09 am GMT
I think Arthur made a good point:
-- There are two Germanic languages which for me are not so easy to "encode" phonetically speaking, which are Danish and Dutch.--
Yes, I also noticed this phenomenon. Dutch and Danish belong to those (maybe together with English) which are the least phonetic ones compared to the other germanic languages.

-- Dutch has experienced very few sound changes since Proto West Germanic,... --
How do you know that? Do you have any sources?

--The vowel difference in Dutch is recognizable in WEST GERMANIC, thus it changed a bit -in comparison to the others!!!--
This may be true to some degree, but not compared to the english language (concerning the great vowel shift).