Also, It's hard to find anyone who will discuss it seriously that can answer questions that a novice like myself may have...for example, I wonder if the book is indeed fake-if there's any parts based on word of mouth family history? I find it fascinating, for ex, the culture of that region certainly values women more than many other cultures of the world, so is there perhaps some truth to the matriarchal roles alluded to in the Book? Anyone want to discuss it? Message me! :-)
Has the Book been proven to be a fake? I see arguements back and forth but thought it was still open to debate. I know there was an analysis done that tended toward the book being written by a single person - but I've always wondered if that result could have been due to the book being copied by *individual* family member over the ages - i.e. adding/translating passages to be in the modern (for that family member's era) language?
That's because the (living) "Frisian" language you mean is newer (more evolved) than this reconstruction or interpretation of (dead) over-old "Frisian" or "Fryas"? It seems logic that the older a language is, the less diphthongs?
As far as I know: it's the opposite. Languages tend to lose their diphthongs and a lot of typical grammar. Like English lost a lot of their diphthongs while still visible in their spelling. Even Dutch had more diphthongs than their nowadays three. Some of them can still be found in the Dutch dialects.
The 'Oera Linda' story is written in the 19th century and proven fake, which is admitted by the writer who called it a 'joke'.. In the old days Frisian, like the English, used rune signs.
Also, It's hard to find anyone who will discuss it seriously that can answer questions that a novice like myself may have...for example, I wonder if the book is indeed fake-if there's any parts based on word of mouth family history? I find it fascinating, for ex, the culture of that region certainly values women more than many other cultures of the world, so is there perhaps some truth to the matriarchal roles alluded to in the Book? Anyone want to discuss it? Message me! :-)
NewtonDKC 1 year ago
Has the Book been proven to be a fake? I see arguements back and forth but thought it was still open to debate. I know there was an analysis done that tended toward the book being written by a single person - but I've always wondered if that result could have been due to the book being copied by *individual* family member over the ages - i.e. adding/translating passages to be in the modern (for that family member's era) language?
NewtonDKC 1 year ago
The Frisian language has more than 20 different diphthongs, still partly visible in (the related) English spelling too. In this one not so much ;-).
Sel1R 2 years ago
That's because the (living) "Frisian" language you mean is newer (more evolved) than this reconstruction or interpretation of (dead) over-old "Frisian" or "Fryas"? It seems logic that the older a language is, the less diphthongs?
cindytaipei 2 years ago
As far as I know: it's the opposite. Languages tend to lose their diphthongs and a lot of typical grammar. Like English lost a lot of their diphthongs while still visible in their spelling. Even Dutch had more diphthongs than their nowadays three. Some of them can still be found in the Dutch dialects.
The 'Oera Linda' story is written in the 19th century and proven fake, which is admitted by the writer who called it a 'joke'.. In the old days Frisian, like the English, used rune signs.
Sel1R 2 years ago