Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 21st Jun 2012 11:17 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 523283
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
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 





Member since:
2005-10-02
Probably. I find it rather straight forward. There's a couple of odd vowel shifts, but quite logical gramma. The similarities in inflection between male gender and female gender, combined with the lack of syllable-final double consonants in Danish explains why we have conflated the two genders in Standard Danish (dialects are a different matter; my childhood dialect is somewhere being Swedish and Icelandic).

You should try with one of the Celtic languages