Talk:Grammatischer Wechsel

message: why keep them separate? dab (ᛏ) 18:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it certainly is handy to have a separate focus on the synchronic element, but I wouldn't mind them being in one article if this was a separate section at the bottom.  But the Verner's law article, despite a couple of recent improvements, strikes me as a little chaotic.  This merger would have to be done thoughtfully.  --Doric Loon 20:33, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: merge?

message: Should it be included that the s/r alteration is also visible in the Modern Dutch copula, i.e. not just in the Modern English one? Chrispcam 10:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dutch: was/waren

message: I've been playing around with the table.  It was difficult before to see the developments easily, because you had to keep skipping columns to follow the same phoneme through its history.  I think this is better, but the information is so complex that it is difficult to get it just right.  The problem now is to make it easy for the eye to see how the rows are grouped in two.  I've tried using blank rows to create double lines, but this is not ideal.  Does anyone with more experience with tables have a better idea on the aesthetics?  Colour?  --Doric Loon 23:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done something to the aesthetic end by marking the PIE column as key information. That's not especially necessary, though, as the association between the PIE consonant and its two descendants is clear enough from the row spanning. ᛭ LokiClock (talk) 17:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Table

message: I see the table has just been greatly expanded. My first impression is that this is very impressivley detailed, and it has cost a lot of work, but on reflection, it contains far too much information. The purpose of the table is to show PAIRS of consonants which then alternate. We have other articles on Grimm's Law and Verner's Law, which give the whole story. This is a specific article on the phenomenon of consonant alteration in verbs, and its purpose is purely to explain that. Now we have a table which gives FOUR consonant variants for each PIE radical, two of which are irrelevant for the purpose, and the reader cannot easily see which two it is that alternates. I am hesitant simply to revert, but I will do so if we don't get a consensus here. --Doric Loon (talk) 14:17, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I did it to be able to explain the alternation seen in Old English hebban. But now that I think about it, it's probably the only example, as GW only affects strong verbs, which as a rule don't have a -j- suffix in Germanic. So maybe I went a bit overboard on that one. I've removed the extra table rows again, but left the other changes as they were. CodeCat (talk) 21:26, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revision of table by Codecat 

message: In the current article I read the statement: "*f ~ *b (no examples in the modern languages)[citation needed] Old English: hebban – hōf hōfon hafen ("to lift", cf. heave)".
But what about Dutch: hebben (to have), ik heb (I have), jij hebt ((sing.) you have), hij/zij/het heeft (he/she/it has), u heeft ((honorific (sing. + plur.)) you have)?Redav (talk) 21:00, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi @Redav, that is terminal devoicing and developed in relatively recent history, not a remnant of Grimm-Werner. We're talking historical linguistics here, not typological comparisons, so the fact that this might look similar in the modern language is not the point. Doric Loon (talk) 14:11, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  *f ~ *b in Modern Dutch? 

message: Like Dutch, modern German also has this alternation in (aus)erkiesen–(aus)erkoren. However, the infinitive is rather rare. Albrecht J. (talk) 13:11, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi @Albrecht J., if you can find a German who actually uses kiesen - kor - gekoren (with any prefix you like) as inflected forms of a single verb today, I will take my hat off to you and we can put that person's dialect into the article. I am not aware of it in any form of German since the courtly novels. Doric Loon (talk) 14:15, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  r–s in German