What do you think?
Rate this book
The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectal Interrelations
"The Germanic Languages" may easily be read by scholars with limited knowledge of Germanic philology. It provides a solid introduction to the debate generated by attempts at classification. In addition, it contains an extensive bibliography of related works and pays considerable attention to necessary background information."--Language
- GenresLinguistics
192 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1979
12 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
February 15, 2021
Well first and foremost, I have found Hans Frede Nielsen's The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations (and which original Danish Title is De germanske Sprog: Baggrund og gruppering) rather totally and majorly intellectually frustrating, as the (translated into English) text often seems to vacillate between ridiculously easy to being almost impossible to sufficiently understand without an advanced university level linguistic background, and yes, this especially because the necessary language examples featured in The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations often do tend to majorly feel like the proverbial book with seven impossible to unlock seals, since Hans Frede Nielsen seems to regularly make use of far too many abbreviations that are also and equally not even explained in the abbreviation section of The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations (and indeed, even the abbreviation section for some unknown reason actually has a huge amount of German language examples, which really should not be the case, as in my opinion, ALL abbreviations in an English language translation of an originally Danish book on the history of the Germanic languages should be in English and yes, only in English, as one should of course not automatically assume that someone reading The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations will somehow also know and be familiar with German).
And I do indeed find it rather majorly flabbergasting and frustratingly annoying that while for example the chapter in The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations on the Germanic languages as an Indo-European tongue is generally penned in a very easy to understand and sometimes even bordering on the simplistic manner (appreciated yes, but I for one would really have wanted and needed a bit more information and detail presented), when Hans Frede Nielsen then starts providing actual linguistic examples (and especially with regard to sound shifts and language change), he generally uses annoyingly tedious and sometimes even quite indecipherable run-on sentences rife with genre specific jargon (which is also hardly ever textually explained and does leave those of us with but a rudimentary and basic knowledge of linguistics and linguistic terms rather in the dark). For yes, while I was indeed tested on basic linguistics and German language history for my First Comprehensive Exam, I have a PhD in German literature and not in German linguistics and indeed, many of the examples and explanations Hans Frede Nielsen presents in The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations are thus far far too involved and too difficult for someone with just a basic background knowledge of linguistics (and it certainly does feel majorly strange to see the dichotomy between the often almost too simplistic main text of The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations and the usually much too complicated and convoluted featured examples of how the Germanic languages have changed and how the different dialects have interacted with one another).
Therefore, while there certainly has been much interesting linguistic knowledge presented to me in The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations, I also have found the book on the whole and for the most part hugely frustrating (with the simplistic textual parts usually representing what I already know and the for the most part too jargon heavy and convoluted language examples often if not even usually escaping from me). And indeed, the only reason that I still am ranking The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations with a low and certainly quite grudgingly given three stars is that for one, I realise that I perhaps do not have the necessary linguistic background to both appreciate and sufficiently comprehend The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations and that for two, the included bibliography is definitely outstanding and lists very many early and famous historical linguistics pioneers.
And I do indeed find it rather majorly flabbergasting and frustratingly annoying that while for example the chapter in The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations on the Germanic languages as an Indo-European tongue is generally penned in a very easy to understand and sometimes even bordering on the simplistic manner (appreciated yes, but I for one would really have wanted and needed a bit more information and detail presented), when Hans Frede Nielsen then starts providing actual linguistic examples (and especially with regard to sound shifts and language change), he generally uses annoyingly tedious and sometimes even quite indecipherable run-on sentences rife with genre specific jargon (which is also hardly ever textually explained and does leave those of us with but a rudimentary and basic knowledge of linguistics and linguistic terms rather in the dark). For yes, while I was indeed tested on basic linguistics and German language history for my First Comprehensive Exam, I have a PhD in German literature and not in German linguistics and indeed, many of the examples and explanations Hans Frede Nielsen presents in The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations are thus far far too involved and too difficult for someone with just a basic background knowledge of linguistics (and it certainly does feel majorly strange to see the dichotomy between the often almost too simplistic main text of The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations and the usually much too complicated and convoluted featured examples of how the Germanic languages have changed and how the different dialects have interacted with one another).
Therefore, while there certainly has been much interesting linguistic knowledge presented to me in The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations, I also have found the book on the whole and for the most part hugely frustrating (with the simplistic textual parts usually representing what I already know and the for the most part too jargon heavy and convoluted language examples often if not even usually escaping from me). And indeed, the only reason that I still am ranking The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations with a low and certainly quite grudgingly given three stars is that for one, I realise that I perhaps do not have the necessary linguistic background to both appreciate and sufficiently comprehend The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectical Interrelations and that for two, the included bibliography is definitely outstanding and lists very many early and famous historical linguistics pioneers.
April 1, 2014
Hans Frede Nielsen's The Germanic Languages: Origins and Early Dialectal Interrelations is a translation and revision of De Germanske Sprog: Baggrund og gruppering (Odense University Press, 1979).
As a student with a career in Indo-European studies in mind, I was very disappointed by Nielsen's work. In the first two chapters, he assumes that Germanic must be more closely related to some branches of Indo-European than others. Unfortunately, he doesn't accurately examine the evidence. For example, he says that Germanic and Italic must be very closely related because they both have the same root for "tongue" (Latin dingua/lingua), but this same root exists in Indo-Iranian and Slavonic and so must be a remnant from the proto-language instead of a shared innovation. The book is rather inefficiently organized and lacks editing, and it assumes that the reader already has some knowledge of Indo-European linguistics yet it covers ground any IEist would already know.
I lack the training to judge his discussion of the relationship of Germanic dialects to one another, but after his IE blunders, I don't trust him so much. If you are looking for a good overview of the Germanic branch of the Indo-European language family, Routledge's The Germanic Languages is a good resource. Stay away from this odd duck.
As a student with a career in Indo-European studies in mind, I was very disappointed by Nielsen's work. In the first two chapters, he assumes that Germanic must be more closely related to some branches of Indo-European than others. Unfortunately, he doesn't accurately examine the evidence. For example, he says that Germanic and Italic must be very closely related because they both have the same root for "tongue" (Latin dingua/lingua), but this same root exists in Indo-Iranian and Slavonic and so must be a remnant from the proto-language instead of a shared innovation. The book is rather inefficiently organized and lacks editing, and it assumes that the reader already has some knowledge of Indo-European linguistics yet it covers ground any IEist would already know.
I lack the training to judge his discussion of the relationship of Germanic dialects to one another, but after his IE blunders, I don't trust him so much. If you are looking for a good overview of the Germanic branch of the Indo-European language family, Routledge's The Germanic Languages is a good resource. Stay away from this odd duck.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews