J. 'Mach' Wust wrote:
>>But it isn't /'loi.te/ that becomes /lIt/ rather the form which
>>[loe.t@] *developed from* became [lIt], which is a different thing.
> 'Litt' corresponds to Middle High German (which was mostly based on
> Alemannic and Swabian dialects) 'liut(e)', which was pronounced [ly:t(@)].
> Many Swiss German dialects still have the same form (and as Philip Newton's
> pointed out, similar forms are found in Plattdütsch). In Basel, the Swiss
> region next to the Alsace, there's also unrounding of front vowels, and
> people from Basel have told me that the dialect spoken in the Alsace is very
> similar to the one of Basel.
> I'm not quite sure whether the actual standard form developed from that very
> form, since the modern standard is mainly based on dialects of Saxony and
Certainly. MHG /i:/ was diphthongized to /ai/, and MHG to /u:/ to /au/,
so it stands to reason that MHG /y:/ became /2y/ (and later /oy/) as
well. What surprises me most with the Alsatian form is the shortness
and the open quality!
B.Philip Jonsson mailto:[log in to unmask] (delete X)
Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant!