Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 21st Jun 2012 11:17 UTC
Permalink for comment 523446
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-10-02
Nope, the Zealandic province. Old Rural Zealandic is in terms of pronounciation and gramma quite similar to Swedish and Icelandic, but more archaic than Swedish, but not as much as Swedish. Compare Zealandic 'vaðn' with Icelandic 'vatn' or Swedish 'vatten' - and compare with standard Danish 'vand' (silent d, since 'nn' cannot happen word final), or Norwegian 'vann'.

Bornholmsk isn't that different from other Danish dialects (incl. Scanian) - OTOH, I don´t consider Danish and Icelandic to be particularly different. I also consider Old Low Franconian to be easy to read, so my opinion doesn't count